Olympus DSLR (E-400, E-410, etc.) or Nikon DSLR?

[andrew_lee2]

I just got into digital shooting with a Nikon D80 and a few manual focus

lenses, but recently discovered that Olympus's 4/3 DSLR system has adapters

that allow you to use manual focus lenses from virtualy every single

manufacturer under the sun (old Zuikos, Zeisses, Nikkors, and Pentax and Leica

R lenses, to name a few). That appeals to me tremendously. I also love the

small form factor of the Olympus E-400 DSLR (and it's successor, the E-410?)

and prefer its looks to Nikon's DSLRs (coming from a background of small film

camera bodies like rangefinders and Oly's own OM line, smaller for me really is

better).

 

The only drawback that I see (and unfortunately, this is not trivial) is the

difference between the current 1.5x field-of-view crop that I get with my Nikon

and Oly's 2x FOV crop. I prefer shooting with wide and normal lenses (28mm to

50mm focal length, in 35mm film equivalent), so it'll be hard (or expensive)

coming up with fast wide lenses that match this 35mm equivalent. Also, since I

exclusively use manual focus lenses, the viewfinder is important (magnification

and coverage area) and would have to be at least as good as the one on my D80

(and that's not even very good). I've never even seen, let alone pick up, an E-

400, so the jury's still out in that regard.

 

If anyone here went from a Nikon (or even Canon) DSLR to an Olympus DSLR, or

vice versa, and use Zuiko or other MF lenses via adapter, I would love to hear

about your experience. Thanks.

[richard_oleson]

There's one other option you haven't mentioned: Canon's DSLRs can also accept OM, Nikon, Leica and M42 lenses via adapters, and they have a 1.6 rather than a 2.0 "crop factor". My choice was between the E-500 and the Canon XTi/400D, and in the end I went with the Canon. Not having used both I can't say whether I made the right choice or not, but I haven't felt let down....... at least it's another viable option to consider.

[andrew_lee2]

That's true, but I did look at Canon when initially deciding versus Nikon versus Canon. For the price range (< $1K), I just couldn't get over how comparatively 'cheap' Canon (i.e., the Digital Rebels) looked at felt vis-a-vis the Nikon D80. It was a completely subjective, personal choice, I know. I also believe the D80 has a superior viewfinder to the Digital Rebels.

<p>

I guess if the Canon 5D were priced under $1K (hah!), I wouldn't be posting this question.

<p>

The E-4xx on the other hand looks <i>nice</i>. I love its size, and the clean, simple lines. I haven't handled one yet, but just on looks alone I would love to try one out.

[ivaylo_iordanov]

I cannot comment from personal experience but would suggest the following source (a

physicist, photo buff and Olympus devotee) for intelligent guidance into the E-system,

including usage of legacy lenses via adapters.

 

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/index.html (click on "The Olympus E-System")

 

Btw, E-410 aside the E-510 is coming as well (on March 5th), and feature body image

stabilisation.

 

http://www.foto-club.es/Noticiaolympus.htm

 

Oh... and though conservative in styling they look very classy indeed.

[ivaylo_iordanov]

The prices on introduction as anounced on foto-club.es are:

 

OLYMPUS E-410 + 14-42mm f3.5,5.6 759 ?

OLYMPUS E-410 + 14-42mm f3.5,5.6+ 40-150mm f4,5,6 II 959 ?

OLYMPUS E-510 + 14-42mm f3.5,5.6 859 ?

OLYMPUS E-510 + 14-42mm f3.5,5.6 + 40-150mm f4,5,6 II 1059 ?

[james_vornov1]

>>If anyone here went from a Nikon (or even Canon) DSLR to an Olympus DSLR, or vice versa, and use Zuiko or other MF lenses via adapter, I would love to hear about your experience. Thanks.

 

Andrew-

 

I moved from Nikon film cameras to an Oly E-1. At the time, I liked the E-1's ergonomics and the Zuiko 14-54mm much more than the Nikon D70 and it's kit lens at the time. The E-1 is an incredible camera, but its electronics slowly drove me back to Nikon. It was slow to start up or wake from sleep. The autofocus was a simple three point system that was slow compared to the multipoint Nikon system. As Olympus failed to introduce a successor to the E-1, I jumped back to Nikon, buying a D80 which I find much more responsive and fun to use. I shoot with my 24mm or 50mm and have a light, high quality image capture system.

 

That said, I miss the Olympus glass and ergonomics. In the Nikon world, the equivalent now to the E-1 would be a D200 and the 17-55mm 2.8, which is much heavier and more expensive than what the E-1 and it's 14-54mm ever was. If Oly ever introduces a camera equal in features and resolution to the D200, I might just jump back, but for now, Oly isn't really competitive in quality.

[denise_d]

I own both an E-500 (with 14-54mm and 50mm macro lenses) and a D70s (with various Nikon prime lenses) and recently upgraded the D70s to a D200. I prefer shooting at the wide-angle/normal range and although the E-500 is a nice fast lightweight system and the lenses are pretty amazing, I really hate the 2.0 crop factor on the Olympus. The E-500 tends to be what I throw in my backpack when I want snapshots or street stuff, but it's not something I would use for landscapes or nature. Especially not landscapes.

[Greg M]

Take a look on DPReview at the two new Olympus DSLR's, including one (E510) that'll sell for $800 (body only) with image stabilization. I also noted in the Olympus forums this link:

 

http://www.olympus-global.com/en/news/2007a/nr070305edeve.cfm

 

A USM-type motor lens line, including the long-anticipated 14-35(28-70 equivalent) f2 zoom, with the new USM type motor.

[jorgen_udvang]

This is a very difficult question. I ended up not deciding, so I have both Nikon and Olympus now :-)

 

It's a great combination, since the Nikon lenses can be used on my E-1 (I'll get an E-510 when it comes out), while my F-mount Fuji S-3 takes care of studio and portrait work.

[ivaylo_iordanov]

:~) Congratulations, and great photo opportunities to make both "sweat"

[akochanowski]

We were thinking along the same lines. I have been using the E-400, which I picked up in Europe, with a 1980's-vintage 21/3.5 Olympus OM prime for about 2 months. I also use the Olympus magnifier, ME-1, and had KatzEye fit a split-prism focus screen on the camera. It turns out that the KatzEye screen from the E-500 fits perfectly.<p>With the 21mm, you get a 42mm equivalent, except that with the 4/3 format you get more real estate vertically than if you were using a 42 mm lens on a 35mm film system. The Oly OM 24/2.8 equates to a 48mm equivalent, etcetera.<p>The bottom line is you won't really get as wide on a 4/3 system as you can on the Canon/Nikon system (although the kit lens with the E-400, a 14-42, is pretty sharp and very small), but what you will end up with is a pretty ideal street setup. The E-400 feels like the OM or a K1000 or an AE1. With a MF prime and a split screen it is fast and responsive. <p>You have to realize its limitations. The noise at 1600 is worse than Canon or Nikon's DSLR's. Using a MF lens with an adapter means stopped down metering, so you really want to shoot wide open if you want to keep up the speed. In other words, with the setup I described, it is a really nice camera to shoot during the day. <p>FWIW, most of my Americana folder was shot with the E-400, though some also with other cameras.

[akochanowski]

BTW, I forgot to say, my "main" DSLR is a D200. While there's no comparison between what it and the E-400 can do (speed, weathersealing, viewfinder), the files you get from the E system in the 100-400 ASA range are every bit as nice as the Nikon's.

[andrew_lee2]

Thanks so much, Andy; that's exactly the type of feedback I was hoping to get. And the Americana folder is top-notch stuff, as usual.

 

The E-410 was announced for stateside release, so this has become that much more enticing.

 

Great to hear from you, BTW.

[andrew_lee2]

Andy, can you comment a little on your E-400's viewfinder view with the ME-1 (I will probably also spring for the KatzEye screen as well, which I was planning on doing for my D80 anyway before tossing Oly's hat in the ring), esp. compared to your D200's? The initial report from <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/articles/olympuse410/page3.asp" >dpreview</a>doesn't sound promising:

<p>

<i>Like every Four Thirds digital SLR before it the viewfinder view can be best described as 'small', a lack of magnification means that when you're looking through the viewfinder there does appear to be a lot of black space around the actual focusing screen. To be fair however it is quite bright, perhaps a little better than a typical APS sensor-size camera viewfinder.</i>

<p>

If the ME-1 goes a long way toward rectifying that situation, that's good.

<p>

I was also wondering if you might be able to send me a couple of large-ish JPEG sample shots taken at 100 and at 1600. I'll drop you a note first so you have my email. I actually currently do most of my shooting at 1600 (to compensate for shooting mostly indoors with lenses no faster than f/2), so I'm wondering if this is another potential showstopper. Hopefully it's not that big a deal (I don't print large, so am actually not terribly picky when it comes to apparent image quality).

[Greg M]

Actually, you almost can't get as wide as Olympus with either Nikon or Canon with the current lens lines...

 

I've yet to see any current Nikkor OR Canon EF I'd rather have than the 7-14 (14-28mm 35mm equivalent)Zuiko I now use with my Olympus DSLR's...

 

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/gallery/1207184#122785446

 

With Canon, you've first got to pay $2,500 for a 5D, then either $2,000 for the 14mm f2.8EF or make do with the 12-24 Sigma.

 

Tell me which fully corrected superwide DX Nikkor (or any other CURRENT Nikkor for that matter) gets you even as wide...

[akochanowski]

My point about going wide was only in context of a small, portable street camera. I know what Andrew Lee was asking as he shoots similar material to mine. Even if I wanted to shoot that wide, which I don't, I would not walk around with the 7-14, which is 7 inches long.

[Greg M]

Barely 7 inches, including the body, which is shorter than a body the 14-54 with the hood on.

[akochanowski]

Viewfinders are subjective, so I don't know what I can really tell you. If you hold up even a D200 versus a 1970's SLR, like my 24 year old Canon AE1, not to mention my Oly OM's, you appreciate how inferior new viewfinders are compared to the ones we used to get. The E-400 viewfinder is what I would call OK, especially with a magnifier and the KatzEye. You can focus pretty accurately, but it isn't a pleasure to work with. After a few shots you kind of forget about it.<p>

I'll send you some files. I mostly shoot RAW, and a lot depends on the RAW converter. Lightroom does a nice job on E-400 files. No matter what you do, though, 1600 is going to look worse than on the D80. <p>The E-410 has a CMOS sensor, though, while the E-400 had a CCD, so maybe it will be different.

[akochanowski]

I really should finish thinking before I post.<p> To get nice looking RAW files from the E-400 I convert to DNG, THEN use Lightroom. Though both are Adobe products, directly opening the ORF RAW in ACR 3.6, which supports the E-400, generates a noisier-looking file.

[haley_n.]

I am either going to get an Olympus E-410 Or (as should be considered here) a Pentax K10D. I could not see myself getting a Canon Rebel XTi(400D) for a few reasons one being that it looks like cheap plastic, another being I do not like the LCD, nor the viewfinder. I would love to get a Nikon D80 but the kit lens is weak and Nikon lenses cost more than I want to spend. I like the Olympus Zuiko lenses and the fact that the E-410 comes with 14-42mm and 40-150mm lenses, two lenses and a great camera for $899 american is impressive. And the fact that unlike the E-400 it even comes to the US at all is nice.

 

 

As for the Pentax K10D it is everything I want aesthetically and built like a tank, but as with the nikon, not so great kit lens and it is slightly bigger than the E-410 I believe (small size does matter here) I am stuck for the most part and I know my decision should not hinge on whether or not one comes with two lenses. I will have to go take a look at both at a camera shop.

[ray .]

It sounds as if you're getting sidetracked with irrelevant issues. Why not work with the D80?

I'm sure it will yield some great pics for you.

[rendy_setiadjie]

I'm E-1/E-300 user whose having Canon EOS D-SLR as well.

Major reason to use Olympus is its compactness and wonderful 3D results which cannot get from my Canon/Nikon D-SLR. <br>

<br>

Regarding about responsiveness, Olympus is not comparable even with the popular model of Nikon D80 or EOS 400D. <br>

<br>

One of my good friend whose using Nikon D70s also gives his impression that Olympus D-SLR is very outstanding system. One of the biggest advantage for him is better picture quality direct out camera (even he uses his terrific Nikkor lens on Olympus body). Also his E-300 could do the right exposure metering with old AI/AI-S Nikkor lens rather than D70s ! (even D80 cannot do the exposure metering too !)