Considering change from Canon to Olympus

<p>Hello All, I've been lugging a 5D, 70-200-mm, 24-105-mm, 17-40 mm with spare battery, flash etc. The weight kills me and I tend not to bother having it with me and missing out on shots. I'm a starting amateur. I went on a cruise a couple of weeks ago and met another aficionado who had an E 520 with both kit lenses (fits in his wife's handbag). He took 10 X more pictures than me! It seems that as long as I stick to the f/4 lenses, I save a lot of weight but looking at f/2.8 lenses there seems to be little difference in weight compared to Canon, Sigma etc. Any suggestions as to whether I should purchase the E 520 with kit lenses or body only and get the 9-18 mm, 12-60 mm, 70-300 mm or 50-200 mm? Honestly, weight is my priority. Should I even consider the E 420? Any comments and suggestions are most appreciated. Cheers, Alan</p>

<p>Do you want a sensor that does not proportion to 4x6 prints? </p>

<p><a href="http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1372&fl=4">http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1372&fl=4</a></p>

<p>Check out image pick up unit-aspect ratio. Also realize it is 1/4 the size of what you have now.</p>

<p>Keep what you have and get a light weight consumer Canon body with a kit lens. </p>

<p>I also have the Canon 5D, 24-105 and some other eos lenses. The size and weight gets to me at times. That's why I also had an E-510 with the two lens kit. I took that to Italy this summer and constantly around my neck and got lots of good shots. The Canon would have been to much to carry around for that long.<br>

That said, the Olympus is not able to match the image quality of the Canon. So if I'm going out to a garden or event for a couple of hours, I take the Canon. I feel each kit has its place, so I'm keeping the Canon. I just sold the Olympus, and considering getting the Panasonic G1, smaller and lighter yet, great for travel. I agree when you get into the Olympus 12-60 and 50-200 lenses, there is little weight saving over other brands. But their kit lenses are very small and light.</p>

<p>We have a E510 with the kit lenses in our household, and it makes a great travel camera as it is relatively small and light. The quality of the images produced is very good, but you have to be careful not to blow out the highlights. As long as you do not wish to push the iso to extremes, it is a fine camera. I am sure the same applies for the 520 also. I would get to know the kit lenses before spending any more ££'s on additional glass.<br>

I have access to a E400 (the first incarnation of the 400 series). I must admit, I have a real fondness for its small size. This is probably because I still use OM system cameras. The 420 does not have IS, and this can be a deal breaker for some. Lack of IS has never bothered me.<br>

I sometimes use a Canon 10D for work and it is a real beast compared to the Olympus.<br>

Cheers, Steve.</p>

<p>I say get the Olympus. Just ask yourself if you can live with the slower speed of the kit lenses. If the answer is "yes", then get the Olympus 420 or 520 with lenses and don't look back. Or, you can buy the kit and later get a faster lens if you need for certain applications and you'll have the best of both worlds. Either way, it seems as the weight of the Canon gear is hampering your enjoyment of photography (to say the least). Just remember that an Olympus body with a kit lens that you have with you will take a much better photo than a Canon kit that's left behind at home or in your cruise ship cabin. I'd also comment that I never have needed IS, so I went for the E-410 and its smaller size than the 510. IS is given way too much praise as a feature with regard to every day use. You may never need it. But, of course, YMMV.</p>

<p>I certainly would not get rid of the Canon as you'll be sorry the moment you want high quality pictures, but you might also consider buying the new Panasonic micro 4/3s DMC-G1 as it is the most portable dslr made today <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/previews/PanasonicG1/">http://www.dpreview.com/previews/PanasonicG1/</a>. </p>

<p>Alan, you have already fathomed the crucial point here is "kit lenses" not camera make. If you upgrade the glass on the Oly then the weight difference is hardly worth the bother. If otoh hand you are considering kit lenses, why not get yourself an XSI (450d) with its kit? The camera is more or less the same as the E-520, the lenses slightly heavier. Then you's have three options: XSI plus kit, XSI plus L-glass or the full monty with the 5D. Either way you may want to get a WA zoom to make up for your FF 17-40. But you could use the lenses you have assembled, and if you compare the cameras sensor quality on <a title="DXO" href="http://www.dxomark.com/" title="DXO">www.dxomark.com</a> it's no contest. Oh, and they do not compare viewfinders, but you should ...<br>

Hendrik</p>

<p>I thought the real point here was weight, not merely "kit Lenses". After all, he already has some very good lenses but doesn't take the camera and lenses out with him because of the weight. He will get very good results with an Olympus kit, don't make it sound like its a 1MP set up. He has to figure out if he needs fast (and heavier) lenses for low light. If the answer is "mostly no" then he'll do fine with getting an Olympus kit. Just with regard to the two bodies the weight difference is absolutely HUGE- Canon 5D 895 grams Olympus E-420 445 grams, the lens difference will also be huge, and I believe that even the fast Olympus lenses will give a weight savings over the Canon glass too.</p>

<p>Sorry - to spell it out: The crucial point with regard to the reduction in weight the OP is looking for, are the lenses (kit lenses usually being lighter than high class glass) not the make of the camera. Any entry level body is bound to be lighter than his 5D. As he is already involved with Canon, why not remain there and buy their entry level XSI. I did not make the Oly kit sound anything, just pointed out the dxomark and the viewfinder. The killer argument to my mind is the fact that he could use his current lenses should the occasion arise.</p>

<p>Hendrik</p>

<p>Alan, judging from your lens list I think the camera is the least of your weight worries. I say get couple of lightweight primes: 28mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8 or 1.4, and maybe an 85mm f1.8 or 100mm f2 if you need the reach. Leave the flash at home! If you really need flash swap the 5D for a Rebel XTi (not the latest Rebel, but you can use the CF cards you already have). Personally I carry a 5D with the 28, 50, and 135 and no flash which all fits in a small fanny/shoulder pack. If I need to travel especially light it's a pocket camera; Fuji F31fd and nothing else.</p>

<p>Alan,</p>

<p>I'm a E-510 owner with non-kit lenses - 14-54mm and 50-200mm. I went with Olympus because of size and weight and have no regrets for picture quality. As one commentor said, you take better pictures when you have the camera than when you don't, so find a system you want to use instead of one you feel you have to use. <br>

You don't mention what type of photography you expect to do most - to a great extent this will determine the focal length and aperture of the lens you want to use. Regarding lens quality, most of the differences I've seen have to do with trying to push the lens to its limit through enlargement or low light settings. Instead of looking at lens comparison charts or cropping to the pixel level, see if you can use an Olympus to take some shots (friend, camera club, local school, etc.) of the type you usually take and compare them to what you've been getting. If the quality is comparable and weight is your barrier to having a camera when you want to shoot, then Olympus should be considered. If you can't live without the quality you're getting from your Canon then instead of looking for alternate cameras look for alternate ways to pack your gear comfortably.</p>

<p>Hi All, thank you for your input. I'll get the E-520 with both kit lenses but hang on to my Canon gear until I have made up my mind regarding weight vs IQ. I commute between South Africa and the U.S. If I really like the Olympus, I might keep a couple of lenses in S.A. and a couple in the U.S. and travel with just the body and one lens. I'll get back to you in a couple of weeks and let you know how it goes. Cheers for now. Alan</p>

<p>With all respect, I don't know what the misconception is about lower quality from the Oly. </p>

<p>Yes, at ISO 800-1600 the 5D will pound the Oly, but I would put serious cash down that nobody on this forum would be able to identify between large prints made from either of them at low ISO.</p>

<p>I just dumped a whole load of Canon gear to move to Oly, and the only time I ever look back is when I have to do weddings in really badly lit venues. Even then, I have covered them and got paid. The flaky low light AF is more of an issue than the image quality.</p>

<p>I just received a 2m wide poster print of a landscape with very fine detail taken with the E510. It's so sharp and smoothly toned even with your nose against it that it just proves to me that so little of this quality difference actually translates into real life. Do the majority of photographers even bother printing this big? If not, why do we still put so much money down to eek out the tiniest improvement in acuity?</p>

<p> It's all just numbers and measurements which in the grand scale of things are insignificant.</p>

<p>But back to the original point of the OP. The weight difference between the E510+12-60 and the 5D+24-105 is not inconsequential. Bear also in mind that while the 4/3 combination is lighter and more compact, the 12-60 is also faster at the wide end. I would recommend starting with an E510 + 14-42 kit and adding the 9-18, and seeing how this works out for you. If you can live with the slow speed, I'm sure you'll find the quality of the 14-42 and 9-18 is more than adequate for any task you decide to put them to.</p>

<p>I would also recommend trying the 'Mk1' 40-150 f3.5-f4.5 over the newer, slower 40-150, or the 70-300. Its a very good compromise.</p>

<p>4/3 may not be 'the way forward' for the majority of people (and I'm not suggesting Olys have anything special about them), but the misinformation being passed around bothers me somewhat.</p>

<p>David</p>

<p>Hi David, thanks. I looked at the shots taken with the E 420 + 14-42 kit and to be honest I was more than satisfied. I have ordered the E 520 + 14-42 and 40-150 + 70-300. The reach on the Oly (and for the price) is just amazing for the weight. I will probably spring for the 12-60 soon once I have the hang of it. The 9-18 is also on my wish list. Cheers, Alan</p>

<p>I respect both Nikon and Canon and am not wedded to Olympus. I happened to like Olympus's approach to the design of the E series models and the quality and size of the good (not ultra deluxe) lenses. I feel that the advent of Panasonic Lumix to the brand will ensure the stability and ingenuity of designers working on 4/3 and all the complaints about slow to market will get reduced as Lumix finds its market and push Olympus along. As to the colors. Still magnificent and never need fiddling post hoc. I am expecting the mid range E model to be a big hit once it gets established and price drops a few hundred dollars.</p>

<p>I have the E-520 with 3 lenses 14-42, 40-150 and 70-300. I have been extremely pleased with both the light weight and the quality of the photos taken, except with flash in low light (way too long to focus and fire)- But I use flash very rarely. You can't go wrong with Oly unless you need to shoot a lot of events in low light using flash..<br>

Inad Haddad</p>

<p>I currently use an E-300 and have the (original) kit lenses, the 35mm macro, and Sigma's 70-200. I've considered switching or adding a second system, but the costs (and finding Olympus meets my needs) keep me here. Since you have Canon gear I agree with the get an entry level Canon body and keep the glass. I've heard that the latest rebel isn't a bad rig.<br>

Best of luck,<br>

Jesse</p>

<p>I stopped using my Canon DSLR a couple years ago and sold it last year. A couple months ago, I purchased an E-520 with the 12-60mm lens which I never take off. The 5D wins hands down in terms of noise, and smoothness of tone. I'm not sure the 5D with 24-105 vs E-520 with 12-60 is really that much more weight. However, I am very pleased with my results from the E-520 and 12-60 glass.<br>

Why don't you get a Canon G10? Not sure what your image use is, but if you really want to drop weight, the G10 is a powerful little camera. I use a G9 when I'm carrying a 4x5.</p>

<p>Why not keep the canon and take a look at the Panasonic Lumix G1. I looked at it and find it very interesting.</p>

<p>There's about half a kilo difference at least. For me personally that breaks my interest as I tend to hike for 3-4 days with my camera, a tent, food, water etc. 500g could be an extra 2 days food, or an extra lens.<br>

For other things it may not be a big deal. 500g extra is noticable if you're hand-holding it all day though.</p>

<p>Hi. I don't know if you want the alternative view from an Olympus owner, but here goes:<br>

After owning an E-510 for a year and a half, I would never recomment Olympus to anyone, for about 20 reasons.<br>

1) The small 4/3 sensor was a fatal mistake that was based on the false<br /> assumption that silicon sensors would always be very expensive. Olympus<br /> should have learned from the history of microcomputer chips and memory<br /> chips which get cheaper and cheaper, year after year, but the Olympus<br /> brains didn't learn.<br /> Anybody who believes that small sensors are not inferior, really must<br /> read this web page:<br /> http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/full-frame-advantage.htm<br /> <br /> 2) The E-510 is really noisy. See this excellent comparison guide.<br /> http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM<br /> Compare the E-510 images to anything else on your list. Especially<br /> look at the "Still Life 800", and look at the Crayola box at the<br /> lower left corner. And look at the background to the left of it.<br /> Then compare that image to what comes out of a Nikon D40, D60, or D80,<br /> or a Canon 30D, 40D, or whatever.<br /> In E-510 photographs, I can actually see the sensor noise at all<br /> ISO levels, all the way down to and including ISO 100. I have a lot<br /> of great shots that are ruined by noise. A lot. Now I keep my camera<br /> locked at ISO 100, and wish I could get ISO 25. Forget the hype<br /> about how good the E-510 is at high ISOs. It isn't. Olympus<br /> advertises their new E-3 with pictures of pretty girls in bikinis<br /> playing volley ball on a beach under the noon-day sun in order to<br /> show off their cameras and hide the noise. You don't see the noise<br /> under those conditions, but get out of the noon-day summer sun, and<br /> you will see it.<br /> <br /> 3) Limited dynamic range. Blown highlights are commonplace.<br /> Again, look at the bright things in that still life picture, like<br /> the white yarn and the candy in the glass jar.<br /> <br /> 4) Cheap plastic body. Not a good build quality. "Olympus Build<br /> Quality" is a phony advertising slogan, not a fact.<br /> <br /> A while back, I discovered that the hot shoe was broken. The right-hand<br /> side was pulling up. Olympus did not connect the metal brackets of the<br /> hotshoe to the metal frame of the camera. The metal brackets are<br /> attached to the plastic camera body by two thin steel pins that<br /> simply poke into the plastic. With any sideways stress, they pull<br /> out. The hotshoe can't even hold a flash unit for normal use<br /> without breaking. I expected better for a thousand dollars. (I<br /> bought in back when the camera and 2 lenses was a $1K kit, in the<br /> mistaken belief that the E-510 was a quality camera.)<br /> <br /> And there is no attempt at weather-proofing. I mean not even<br /> one rubber ring to keep out some dust, dirt, and rain. Nothing.<br /> (Coincidentally, I was just looking at a cheap old Olympus Stylus<br /> film point-and-shoot camera at Goodwill -- $5 and it was weatherproof.<br /> Rubber rings everywhere. So it isn't like Olympus doesn't know<br /> how to do it. They just didn't bother.)<br /> <br /> 5) The auto-focus is a work in progress. In the beginning, the auto-focus<br /> was very bad. In anything but bright light, it would hunt and seek and<br /> convulse and lock up. I ended up falling in love with manual focus because<br /> of Olympus auto-focus.<br /> <br /> In all fairness, in firmware upgrade 1.2, they seemed to have fixed<br /> it. I only had to wait 5 months after getting the camera for them to fix it.<br /> <br /> But then some new defects appeared: the camera body would not even<br /> recognize the wide-angle kit lens when it was mounted on the camera<br /> until the second try. <br>

The other kit lens, the 40-150mm lens, also has a "two times" problem, but the<br /> problem is very different. There, it takes two photographs for it to focus. Whenever<br /> I haven't taken a picture in a few minutes, and aim at something new, the camera<br /> fails to focus for the photograph, and won't focus until I take a second photograph<br /> of the same thing. There you will see over and over again the pattern of one<br /> bad photograph followed by one in focus. Subsequent shots will be in focus,<br /> provided that you are shooting the same subject at the same distance. But then<br /> again, that doesn't require refocusing, does it?<br /> <br /> So, I sent the camera back to the factory for warranty repairs. They fixed the<br /> broken hotshoe and the problem with not recognizing the wide-angle 14-45mm lens,<br /> but the "1st shot out of focus" problem with the longer lens has recurred, and<br /> now the camera is out of warranty.<br>

Olympus is making me love manual focus.<br>

Speaking of manual focus, that's out. I just discovered 4 days ago that all E-volt cameras (except the E-3) leave the factory with out-of-alignment focusing screens. Olympus does not adjust or calibrate them so that they show proper focus. Basically, the ground glass focusing screen is the wrong distance from the mirror, and Olympus didn't make any provisions for adjusting and fixing it.<br>

So, when the viewfinder shows you to have sharp focus, the lens is out of focus relative to the sensor. And vice versa. So you are going to get a lot of soft-focus pictures if you try to do manual focus through the viewfinder.<br>

Well, that isn't 20 items, but I'll stop there.<br>

I just found this post in this forum, about the E-500. He has some revealing comments too:<br>

Garry B , Jul 10, 2007; 03:17 p.m.<br /> The lenses are surprisingly sharp, but I would not consider them up to par<br /> with the best of Nikon or Canon Glass. Also, if you prefer to use manual focus,<br /> you can forget about Olympus. The focus ring is way too flimsy and there is<br /> nothing in the viewfinder to assist you with fine focusing (maybe you can get<br /> something like a split screen from Olympus, but I have not checked into that).<br /> Having dropped an Olympus Zuiko lens a few years ago, I have had the privilege<br /> of seeing all of its guts, and let me tell you I did not like what I saw.<br /> The entire zoom and focus mechanism is made out of plastic gears. Give it a<br /> few years of consistent use and you can expect your lens to serve as a nice<br /> paper weight or lupe at best. <br /><br>

Lastly, consider that there are some very good reasons why Canon and Nikon are the biggest sellers, and Olympus is a minor bit player. Like quality.<br>

You can't fool all of the people all of the time...</p>

<p> </p>

<p>After reading the above Terrance Hodgins response, I found myself setting an opinion based upon results. I have shot several weddings with the Olympus E-series DSLRs and found them to be very reliable, SHARP TACK is excellent, and the photos were easily worked within Photoshop.</p>

<p>No DSLR is perfect. Yet I’ve found the E-series such as the E-510, E-500, and the E-3 to meet and exceed the capabilities to render quality photos from extensive shooting sessions.</p>

<p>The debate over the 4/3 sensor and the studies of digital noise have been based upon worse case scenarios. Professional digital photographers tend to avoid setting the ISO high and becoming inflicted with the noise issue, regardless of camera make. Granted, the Canon and Nikon initially appear to have less digital noise. However, to compensate for Olympus E-series photos, a quick action tool and batch process within Photoshop eliminates this anomaly. The same applies for color/hue correction and dynamic range.</p>

<p>The so-called “cheap plastic body” seems to be Mr. Hodgins opinion insomuch that greater weight renders higher quality. Most Olympus photographers don’t find themselves in harsh climates or environments that may cause camera failure such as treading the Okefenokee Swamp or the heights of Mount Washington. The Olympus E-510 “cheap plastic body” and its weight factor makes wedding photography and other photo sessions a much lighter task. I remember lugging around the Bronica ETRSi. What a job!</p>

<p>I concur that little was done in the effort of sealing the E-510 from inclement weather conditions. If it’s raining, I do what most professional photographers do with most any camera system. A “cheap plastic bag” over the body does wonders. As for dust, dirt and other earthly attributes, there have been no problems unless of course one finds themselves in a sand storm in the Sahara.</p>

<p>The hot shoe incident must be quite isolated. I have shot extensively with the E-510 over the past 14 months, and never experienced the problems with the hot shoe. Besides, a good photographer would shoot flash off-camera. I use the FL-50 including the off-camera adaptor. There’s no need to have an on-camera flash, unless one takes pleasure in duplicating the same light effect as your Motor Vehicle Licensing Bureau.</p>

<p>In normal light conditions, auto-focusing has never been a problem. In my wedding shoots and other assignments, I always keep a fresh supply of fully charged batteries. I have noticed that when the battery level dips into the red zone (warning that the energy is getting low), the auto-focus has a tendency to search and lock. Quickly pop in a new battery and voilà, not a problem! Under low-light conditions the search/lock problem exists with most DSLRs that offer AF.</p>

<p>One is not limited to the good quality AF lenses afforded by Olympus. When it comes to the need for ultra high quality glass, such is the case of doing portraits, the Carl Zeiss lens from my Hassey fits quite well on the special adaptor for the E-series Olympus DSLRs. And for low light conditions, the Zuiko OM f:1.2 55mm lens has superior glass. Those who contend that the C’s and N’s have better glass and quality over the Olympus E-Series lenses need to put their biases aside. I’ve been on a few group photo shoots, and those who brought their expensive Nikons and Canons were sometimes out shot by the inexpensive Sony, Pentax, and yes, even the “cheap plastic body” Olympus E-510 cameras.</p>

<p>Mr Hodgins failed to mention the Image Stability built into the E-510. Unlike the Canons and Nikons, Olympus does not have the luxury of selling expensive image stability lenses because the feature is built into the camera body. The user’s purchasing power of acquiring various Olympus fast AF lenses exceeds that of its competitors.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I can relate to excessive noise and lack of DR compared with bodies with larger sensors, but I'm getting pretty good at controlling the highlight and shadows (with an E-300). As mentioned no single system is perfect, but I'm sticking with my beloved (and cool looking) E-300 until it dies. I saw some test images from the up and coming E-30 and I'm impressed with its noise reduction capabilities. Things will only get better...especially once they release the 100mm macro lens. :D<br>

Jesse</p>

<p>Hello All, thanks again for all the responses. I have ordered the E 520 + kit lenses + 70-300. I should get it tomorrow. I am a beginner amateur and look at it this way. I have seen results from professionals using Olympus and they are better than what I ever achieved with my Canon set-up. Of course they know what they're doing and I don't. They might get even better results with my Canon set-up, so it's the age old story about knowing your craft. Results is however what counts. I'll take better pictures with an E 520 + 14-54 mm (f/2.8) + 70-300 mm +9-18 mm @ 1805 gr. as opposed to my Canon gear (3360 gr.) that I don't have with me because of the weight. I still haven't found my niche. The more I learn about photography, the worse my pictures are. That is of course because I get more experimental as I go along. Considering the fact that I am very much a beginner, I would like to add that after reading some posts about the "cheap" plastic bodies of the Olympus it will also be a hell of a lot cheaper to replace or to upgrade as technology evolves. Anyway, I'm pretty excited to get my new gear and experiment. Again, thank you all for your input. Cheers, Alan</p>

<p>Blown highlights with the E510 don't have to be a problem. The camera comes setup with multi-segment metering tied to the half press of the shutter release, but in the menu system you can set metering up to continue to measure the scene after you press the release half-way down to focus, which works great for me since I tend to "focus and recompose" a lot, so the better place for the final metering to take place is after I recompose, not when I focus.<br>

As far as focus accuracy, if the system can follow thoroughbreds around the track, allowing you to both zoom, re-focus and shoot at the same time and keep the subject in focus, then I have no idea what it is Terrance is trying to shoot..<br>

<a href="http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/gallery/5125003_NnieF#309532718_dexaW">http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/gallery/5125003_NnieF#309532718_dexaW</a><br>

Wanna REAL cheap plastic body Terrance? Go buy a Digital Rebel.<br>

Need a weather-proof body? Buy a professional camera (hint here...cameras in the E510 class, no matter the maker, are not weather-proofed).<br>

Quoting Ken Rockwell is almost as bad as getting your *news* from the National Enquirer.<br>

All that said, yes, there's always the chance of getting a lemon body or one that needs a focus adjustment....even Nikons..<br>

<a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=30182759">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=30182759</a><br>

and even (my goodness!) Canon..<br>

<a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=30428733">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=30428733</a></p>