Olympus XA vs Stylus epic?

What camera do you prefer to carry around as a "just in case a moment comes up" camera?

 

I have the Stylus epic, and I love it. Should I get the XA?

I own both, and my Stylus is a zoom model, IIRC the longer zoom model.

 

If you already have a Stylus, I'd keep using it, and probably wouldn't spend money on an XA.

 

For me, if it's raining I'll take the Stylus. If I'm going to have it in a fanny pack on my body while motorcycling, Stylus. If I'm going to hand it to strangers to take pics of me and my g/f while touring, Stylus. Indoor shots, Stylus due to flash.

 

Dry, I think the XA does a better job. I think the XA has a better lens. But manual focus stymies strangers. And I don't want to get it wet, as it's my first real camera, bought new in 1982.

I had one of each. The zoom never delivered sharp or contrasty pix--it was like the lens was covered with scum from the start (though it wasn't--or at least I couldn't see it.) I got it for my wife, and she wouldn't use it. Though it was a nice camera at the start, and always took good pictures, the non-zoom stylus developed a leak around the extending lens, and the last time I cleaned house I threw them both in the trash. I still have the XA I bought my wife in 1980, and it's a great camera, and going strong. She took it to Mexico for three months and brought back hundreds of really beautiful CTs. The build quality is totally different from the others. But the bolt-on flash is inconvenient.

My sense is that Marko has the *non-zoom* Stylus Epic -- 35mm f/2.8 lens.<p>

 

If that's the case, Marko, and if you're happy with how the Epic performs and the results you're getting, then I agree with just about everything Doug said. And I'd stick with it.<p>

 

Pretty darn good camera. There's a reason it's still <a href=http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=search&ci=1&shs=OLSE*&Q=&O=>available new after all these years</a>.<p>

 

One thing I did not like about the Epic (still have it but speak of it in past tense because it's seldom used) was the camera's tendency to shoot 'wide open' at f/2.8 -- or so it seemed -- at times when I'd rather have a smaller aperture.

Well, thats what you get with a P&S. I personally like this, reduces shake, and i like it wide

open.

The fixed lens Stylus probably has a better lens than the XA. The XA is sharp, but wide open there is quite a bit of light-fall off and the distortion in the corners is pretty severe. I tend to shoot my cameras at the extremes because I enjoy the quirky results of pushing the performance envelop of them.

<br><br>

Here are two examples showing distortion and light fall-off:

<br><br>

<img src="http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b15/patrickjdempsey/Olympus%20XA/maryleigh/maryleigh_xanpz800_04.jpg">

<br><br>

<img src="http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b15/patrickjdempsey/Olympus%20XA/randomwinterstuff/xa_gold400_23.jpg">

<br><br>

If you shoot conservatively, then these issues shouldn't be a problem... I just like to make sure people are aware that this camera does NOT have perfect optics and many people taut. It's a great little camera and having control over the aperture is a great thing.

Like some of the other posters I have one of each. For quick, informal flash pics the Stylus Epic (fixed lens)is hard to beat. The XA is great for non-flash pics. You can also make automatic time exposures up to several seconds. The XA lens is a retrofocus design necessary for its design and may not perform as well wide open as traditional (Tessar type) 2.8 lenses, but from f4 on it does very well. The Epic lens is good, but you must make sure that it is focusing on what you want. As a cheap alternative (for loaning out, etc) there's the zone focus XA-2, which is usually quite cheap.

Here's a shot taken with an XA-2 inside a bookstore. Camera was set on a table and self-timer was used.<div></div>

Here's a shot taken with an XA-2 inside a bookstore. Camera was set on a table and self-timer was used.<div></div>

Here's a shot taken with an XA-2 inside a bookstore. Camera was set on a table and self-timer was used.<div></div>

Here's a shot taken with an XA-2 inside a bookstore. Camera was set on a table and self-timer was used.<div></div>

Nice! I do that sometimes.

 

Quad posts?

I'm interested in this question as I have an Epic Stylus on the way to me, and I've heard so much good stuff about it. I have an XA that I absolutely love (although I like using an Olympus 35RC quite a bit more), and I love the pictures that I get from it. I personally don't care for the vignetting the lens causes at the wider apertures, although I know a lot of people do.

I don't know if it's just my sample, but my Stylus Epic is quite noisy while shooting. Nonetheless, I'm getting an extra one soon. Great traveling cameras.

<p>

<img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/5/4609785_41432ade0c.jpg?v=0">

Sorry about the multiple posts. My computer was acting up or maybe it was my Internet. The screen was going blank after clicking submit and then "timing out." Next time, I will just wait. Thanks for your patience.

I have one of each of the XA, XA-1, XA-3, and XA-4. I have two working XA-2's and two that need repair. The XA-2's seem to be the best bargain. And they are very quiet when you click the shutter. Here's on with an XA-2 done from church balcony during my church's Christmas Eve candlelight service.

I promise, no quadruple posts this time.;-)<div></div>

I was eying both the Olympus XA and the Stylus Epic about six months ago when I was looking for an inexpensive pocket camera. Both models were going for a bit more on Ebay than I wanted to pay. Instead, I ended up picking up a Canon Elph Jr. with a 2.8 lens for $8.50. I don't think the Elph has nearly the fan club of the XA or Stylus, but I've got to say I'm impressed with the pictures it takes - plus it's smaller than either of the other models. The big downside is that it uses APS film, which will probably make my Elph obsolete within a few years.<div></div>

Sory about the large photo size on that last post. I didn't realize I was downloading such a large file

Bruce, that Elph Jr. shot is impressive. I'm finishing a roll in an Elph Lt. with its wide angle lens, and am looking forward to what I'll get back. Admittedly this camera has taken a back seat to a 'new' Stylus Epic that I just received last week and put a roll through already, but I still anxiously await the outcome of the little Canon's performance. It's absolutely tiny, but the wide angle view is a welcome feature.

Andy, I'd be curious to hear how you think the Elph compares to the Stylus once you get the pictures back. As for the Elph's wide angle lens, I think that's probably more a function of the APS format (4x7 vs 4X6) than the lens itself. When I set the mask to the classic 35mm format, the view seems to match what I see through the 40mm lens of my Canon Canonet QL17 rangefinder. I do find myself composing shots somewhat differently when using the 4X7 format, though.