Evolt E-500

[darrenyates]

Does anyone have any feedback on the Evolt E-500?

 

Thanks Darren

[Greg M]

http://photographyreview.com/cat/cameras/digital-cameras/digital-slrs/olympus/PRD_344765_3127crx.aspx

 

Take your pick from several threads related to the E-500 here:

 

Google is so easy...give it a try.

 

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1022

 

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/e500-review/index.shtml

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse500/

 

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/camera/user_review/olympus_e500/show.html

 

A few sample images here:

 

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/olympus/e_500

[GerrySiegel]

I am impressed with the store handling and in store shots and the bi screen and the big LCD and the nice layout. And Wrotniak,who bought one iwith his own cash did an extensive analysis here: http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/e500-rev.html Run, don't walk to the dealer and get the kit. It is yummy. Depending on what you are seeking of course. I like the cut of its jib.

[sandor_a._feher]

Highly recommended. I just got my last week w.two lens kit from Circuit City for $799.-

Attached is a photo taken with the 45-150 mm lens, ISO 200, f8/1/160th, FL 141mm, original file jpeg 1.75 MB.<div></div>

[luisarguelles]

I bought an E-500 about one month ago. First, let me say that I'm a Leica-M user, that is, a person that takes pictures with it (ok, I must recognize that I also fondle my M2 from time to time :). Although the E-500 is not built as a Leica or as an Olympus OM-1, I can live very well with it (while for example I can't stand Canon's plastics). The kit lens (14-45mm) is rather good, although for my personal likes it's a bit dark, specially at the 45mm setting, where you have an f/5.6 aperture.

</p>

There is some noise at high ISO values, but I've found that 640 ISO represents a very good balance between sensitivity and noise. For me, the most important issue is the system for removing dust, although there are another very interesting features of this camera. For example, and by means of adapters, you can use manual lenses made by Olympus, Nikon, Leica (R system), Minolta,... even M42 thread lenses, while conserving light metering, both matrix metering, averaged and spot. Please, see this picture taken handhold with my E-500 and a Nikkor 200mmf/4 lens (effective focal length = 400mm) from my kitchen's window:

</p>

http://www.photo.net/photo/3906464&size=lg

</p>

I've bought also the 11-22mm zoom, an excelent lens. Please, see for example:

</p> (640 ASA, horrible fluorescent light: )

http://www.photo.net/photo/3904822&size=lg

</p> (100 ASA:) http://www.photo.net/photo/3923815&size=lg

</p> (spot metering with a Nikkor 35mm f/2: )

http://www.photo.net/photo/3922786&size=lg

</p>

In my opinion is an excellent camera. While I'm usually a "film user", I find this digital camera produces great pictures.

[richard_oleson]

I haven't managed to get my hands on one of these yet, and I don't own a digital SLR (and am unlikely to be able to afford to correct a bad decision on one).

 

Can anyone comment on the viewfinder of the E-500? I just looked at a Canon digital rebel and a Nikon D70 today and was a little shocked: I would be able to live with the Canon's finder okay, but the one in the Nikon was like looking into a black hole, so dark that it took a second to realize that the lens cap wasn't on. I had no idea that there would be so much difference between one major brand and another in competitive models (lens specs on the two were the same).

 

Those weren't what I had in mind anyway, I was looking for an E-500 but they didn't have one. Has anyone compared the E-500's finder brightness to the Nikon or Canon competitors?

 

rick :)=

[luisarguelles]

Richard, the E-500 viewfinder reminds me the one in the D70, although I have not made a simultaneous comparison, that is, I only compare what I see in the E-500 against my memories using a D70. Small viewfinder?, when compared to the viewfinder of an OM-1 or a Leicaflex SL, yes. However, the E-500 viewfinder is brighter and bigger than the one in a Leica IIIf, I can guarantee you that I've taken lots of lovely pictures with my blak dial IIIf.

[richard_oleson]

I've taken some decent pictures with my IIIa, too, but I wouldn't want to pay $800 for it as my main camera.....

[daniel_kreithen1]

Was the battery in the D70, and was it on? I think it has some sort of LCD overlay over the focus screen, and without power it appears to be very dark. I'm not 100% sure of this, better check for yourself.

[daniel_kreithen1]

The finders on the Rebel XT, D50, D70, KM 5D, and, unfortunately, the E500 are passable, but that's about all. From what I've seen by handling various models, the better finders amongst the currently less expensive models are the KM 7D, the Oly E-1, and the first Pentax *istD, with the Pentax and KM better, and the Oly still very good. At the time I bought, the price advantage was with the E-1, so that's what I bought, and I've been very happy with it. Right now, a new E-1 is a steal, priced around $750 or so (body only). If you go for the 14-54, you'll have a very nice setup for not a lot of money (in digital camera terms, anyway). If I were to have to decide between the models on the less expensive step down, I'd look closely at the KM 5D and the Oly E-500. The are less expensive than the Nikon and Canon competitors and are quite credible machines.

[richard_oleson]

thanks daniel! no, i don't think the nikon had power, i didn't realize it needed that for the screen (i'll have to figure out how that works). it certainly seemed unusable as it was....

[luisarguelles]

Richard, yes, don't know why, but without batteries, the D70's viewfinder is dim and seems also blurry.