How good/competitive is a DSLR such as an E-520 (new to digital)

[paul_loader]

Oh dear, another one of those questions. I suspect this forum and many others are littered with confused owners,

potential owners, enthusiasts and ever-changing apsirations. So, I'm sorry to tread the boards with one of those

questions that are wildfire with every camera release.

 

I realise this is a wide question so here is my situation. I gave up film this year selling my Nikon legacy collection

and I specifically did not want to keep the Nikon lenses to use with digital. In fact, I don't really want a Nikon or a

Canon, just a personal thing I won't dwell on even though I have just discarded the two market leaders.

 

My shooting is family/amateur and in my film years I moved away from consumer viewfinders and consumer lenses

as I did not like either. I used portrait lenses and the mid/high end Nikons without buying the pro bodies so I still got

the lovely porthole viewfinders. Whether shooting indoors or outdoors I would typically shoot candid family portraits,

mostly of my daughter grorwing up, between f4 to f8 and around 35mm to 105mm perspective. My daughter is now

8. I still like to put A4 sized pictures on the wall.

 

Since the rate of evolution with digital is cruel to the money we spend on camera bodies I hoped to avoid buying a

DSLR for a few years until all the madness stops. Some hope!

 

I bought a Panasonic DMC-LX2 a short while ago and I have mixed views. Used in a narrow way I can get some nice

shots but I really have to work at it and away from natural outdoor light I see insufficient focal sharpness and clarity. I

have tested this using a tripod, varied the light levels and settings and given it a fair crack. I like the movies and the

variable aspect ratios but it hasn't scratched the quality itch I hoped it might.

 

So, I am back to the DSLR dilemma. The web is full of reviews and opinions and it is really hard to make sense of

the contradictions, particularly when (as I understand it):

1. our monitors often wrongly suggest artefacts of noise and purple fringing which are actually down to upsampling

and downsampling in the pc, and

2. printing technology can only show a limited amount of the resolution we capture

 

This seems to make almost all that we read unreliable. However, we have to start somewhere so in my case I have a

soft spot for the E-series and whilst there are good deals around on the E-510, I like the features added to the E-520

even if resolution is the same. Oh, and I realise the viewfinders are not

their strongest point.

 

So,

3. 14mp sensors require an awful lot of lens and it does not follow that a 10mp sensor/lens combination is

inadequate or inferior when designed properly. Olympus make a big thing of this certainly. How good is Oly image

quality?

4. I have read the suggestions that E-520 shots are inferior to E-510. Hopefully this is down to defualt settings and

the E-520 is equally as good when adjusted the same?

5. The Pentax K200D shots on the camerlabs review looked better than the Oly E-series and Canon 450D shots to

my eyes but in the video the editor remarked that one had to pay careful attention to the Pentax settings. This

inferred that they were manipulated/set-up in a certain way but I'll say again that on my monitor they looked better.

Is the Oly as good as Pentax for detail or do Oly capture less?

6. Finally, it's very hard to know just how good a camera like an E-520 is and whether digital really has caught up

when compared to something like a Nikon F90X shooting a 85mm 1.8 AF-D lens and ISO100 Fuji or Kodak slide.

Maybe this is unfair, maybe digital caught up a long ago, I don't know. I just know my LX2 isn't at that level.

 

I have to say I would buy a twin-lens E-520 kit if I go for it and have no idea what benchmark those who say the kit

lenses are good work to. Price wise this has greater appeal than say a Pentax K20D and working towards limited

primes. Again, hard to understand how "you don't get something for nothing" and "laws of diminshing returns" apply

to DSLRs and the final proof has to be in the images.

 

Which brings me back to the alleged unreliability of much of what we look at on screen. All rather confusing. Any

thoughts from those who have been around the block with some of this kit are most welcome!

[phule]

You're going to hate this response but here it is.

 

It doesn't matter.

 

If you're not shooting professionally, and you're not planning on making 30 inch prints, then it just doesn't

matter. Really. All things being equal (meaning: the photographer is competent) any DSLR you buy is going to

enable you to produce a high quality image. Any.

 

The differences between models are often so subtle as to be insignificant. This is best demonstrated by the

massive number of foaming-at-the-mouth debates people have with each other over 200% views of resolution charts.

It's absurd.

 

You buy the camera that fits well with your budget and your known long-term goals. If the Olympus system appears

to match well then buy one. If the Pentax system is more in line with your needs, then buy that. This is a

tremendous time to be a photographer at any skill level.

[leandro_dutra1]

<p>Olympus quality is great, except if you have loads of money and want the best ISO 3200, low-light photography

money can buy.</p>

 

<p>The E-520 has a stronger antialias filter. This is not usually an issue, unless you are pixel-peeping. It

helps prevent the Moiré effect.</p>

 

<p>I know nothing of the Pentax line-up.</p>

 

<p>Yes, digital has caught up, at least for the usual SLR price points. This is not to say you may not get great

images from the best film and lenses available, but then you can always get an E-3 or even a full-frame,

professional body with multi-thousand dollar prime lenses.</p>

[godfrey]

Any of the DSLRs made since 2004 can produce excellent, professional calibre photographs. If you must be on the bleeding

edge of features and performance, you're on the treadmill of spending money all the time. If, however, you are interested in

obtaining a camera to make your photographs with, pick any of the better cameras of the past four years that suits your

hands, and has available quality lenses appropriate to your use, and it will do the job.

 

I buy way behind the bleeding edge, most of the time. I bought two 2003-2004 E-1s around last year's holidays at absurdly

low prices for professional quality gear and find them to be superb image makers. They're only 5Mpixel but I'm making 11x14

and 16x20 prints with them that are stunningly well detailed and satisfying to look at. They are sensitive and perform fast

enough for my picture taking. And I like the controls and the way they fit in my hands.

 

The new E-520 model looks to be a very high performance body. It has a ton of great features, good sensor, and Olympus

lenses are amongst the best in the industry today. If it fits your hands and you like the controls, rest assured it will do a

great job for you for most photographic needs.

 

If there is some *specific* thing that you need a camera to do, well, then you should research the E-520 vis-a-vis that

specific thing and contrast it against other offerings in the market ... There might be a competitor that out performs it on the

specific requirement and it would be more sensible to address that need.

 

Godfrey

[nicholas_fiduccia1]

First of all, for all practical purposes, APS-C (or 4/3) digital has surpassed 35mm film in overall picture quality. The areas

that film does better in (maybe) - resolution - will not matter to most people. Also, I think B&W film may still hold an ever so

slight advantage because of it's ability to hold a greater dynamic range, but this window is closing. I'd say, come on in (to

digital), the water feels fine.

 

Pentax and Olympus both make fine cameras and either one will do for your purposes. I would choose depending on

features. One feature regarding Pentax is that both bodies that they currently offer are weather-sealed. This is important to

me since I like to shoot landscapes and I am often shooting in rainy or dusty conditions. However, I think it is an important

feature even if you are a casual shooter who only occasionally shoots outdoors. Weather-sealing helps to keep the sensor

clean and give one confidence to be able to shoot in light-rain or around water.

 

Also, it sound like the Pentax K200D would be a great camera for you and currently with the rebate going on, it can be had

for about $500. If small is important and you do not mind zooms, the Oly 520 would be great. If you like high quality primes

and weather sealing, then Pentax has it in spades!

[jim nichols]

I went through the same soul searching debate several months ago, before the E-520 was released. At that time there were some debates about the Pentax line that pushed me toward Olympus. I bought the E-510 and the Zuiko 14-54 lens, which is a step up from the normal kit lens.

 

I feel that the photos that I have made with this system are some of the best I have ever obtained. I started with a Leica IIIa and 50/3.5 Elmar in 1952, and have tried a number of different systems. You won't be disappointed with the E-520 and a Zuiko lens of your choice.

 

Here are links to a couple of recent images:

 

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Swallowtail.tif.html

 

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Lily+for+July.jpg.html

[ronald_moravec1]

colors go all over the map because of non color managed brousers and people who do not imbed a color profile with up loaded

images, so what you see on a screen is not necessarily what the camera produced. There are NO monitor standards to put it

simply. You can not judge by what individuals put up period.

 

I am going to agree with Godfrey above. Bigger sensors are better for bigger prints. 12x16 mm OLY sensors are big enough

for 8x10 in prints or monitor viewing. If you want high ISO and bigger prints, then you need a bigger sensor camera.

 

OLY makes three classes of lenses. Consumer, better and pro. They get expodentially more expensive. Check Olympus USA

website.

 

Do not get swayed by MP count numbers. 6 is all you need for 8x10. 8 is not practically better than 6 real world. 12 is better

than 6 real world for bigger prints.

 

The problem with small sensors is wide lenses are very short focals and hard to design. It is difficult to make lenses that have

short debth of field. Out of focus effect lovers complain.

 

Photography is a compromise with everything you do.

[richsimmons]

At one time, I had gotten my choices down to the Pentax and the Olympus. I bought the Olympus E-500. I've been happy with it, although I now feel I'm starting to outgrow it and with the pricing, going up to an E-3 doesn't seem economically wise when I can get a Canon 40D with a lens for the price of an E-3 body alone.

 

Nonetheless, when the Olympus is in its element, it works really well. They do have a tendency to hunt when there isn't enough light and it will strobe the flash, which is annoying. But, using a hot-shoe flash pretty much eliminates this problem. I use an FL-36, which is mid-range, but it makes all the difference. Using the built in flash can be harsh, but I bought a Gary Fong Puffer and it really does soften the light when I don't feel like using the flash.

 

Image quality is good as far, as I'm concerned, up to 400. Above that, things start to get some grain. The kit lenses are really much better than I've seem with most other systems and their catalog of lenses is growing. I also have the 35mm/3.5 macro, which I really like.

 

Putting a good lens on the camera will overcome a lot of the bodies shortcomings.

[paul_loader]

I really appreciate the variety of points in the responses.

 

As is typical in these situations, this afternoon my head says take advantage of the typical E-510 offer around at

present because the E-520 images I see in comparisons look equal to the E-510 at best and possibly softer. I am in

London, UK so this means the E-510 twin lens kit for GBP 450 or less.

 

Of course, up to the point I purchase I shall change my mind, then again, then again, lots of

laughs.

 

BTW, I have previously picked up an E-510 and a K200D so I know how they feel in the hands. It is more a question

of the points I raised and in this regard, the replies so far are really helpful.

[GerrySiegel]

It sounds Paul that you are more or less a casual shooter with some discriminating taste for sharp images with

good color. I expect a lot of us fall in the same category with no special needs like super lightweight or super

low light.

 

I have a soft spot for Olympus since the day I bought the C 5050 and later the E-1 and several quality lenses.

The only thing I might want now is a larger LCD- since that is one improvement in last three years as well as

image shake control- so I can review my results in the field. It seems that the E520 will do the job for you

admirably and without a huge outlay of cash. One of the good values in shopping for any tech gizmo nowadays. I

don't see how you can go amiss with the E 520. The reviews of the E 510 have been encouraging. Like all cameras

it doesn't optimize every feature out there or coming down the pike.....

 

Same with automobiles, eh? I wish you well. It is tough with other good offerings,eg Pentax, that all have

attractions. gs

[sheygetz]

Try it in a store - better still, get it from a shop with a liberal return policy.

 

For A4 prints there is really no use in debating IQ or detail etc. Actually, I'm surprised that after having read extensively on the web, this is the one question you're asking here. If you do want to pixel peep, the review sites you obviously are familiar with are the place to go. They have the testing equipment. Here you will get very personal accounts, which will hardly be objective, as no one will have tried all the entry DSLRs. You yourself are an excellent example in that you shun Canikon, which of course you may well do, without any rationale. (But what if I convincingly told you that the 450D/XSi had the best resolution/ AF/ high ISO?).

 

The handling seems so much more important to me. How is the viewfinder for you? How is your grip on the camera, what do you need to do, which button to push where, to do whatever you think you'll use often? You leave the cam in Auto ISO all the time, but fool around with exposure comp all the time? Mimick those moves in the shop - if needs be imagine them from the manual and a picture on, say, dpreview.com. (Personally I positively hate - and that is by way of example only - the way Nikon wants me to take my left hand from underneath the lens barrel and use it to push buttons on the cam's left-hand site. And in some cases you even have to keep them pushed while you twirl the wheel.)

 

And finally there are some features the Oly has and others haven't and vice versa. Ask yourself, what do you need. You're in a good position, as you know photography. How about high ISO, fast AF, fast shooting, wireless flash ability, etc. Make a check-list of the conditio sine qua nons and the nice-to-haves.

[paul_loader]

Thanks for a thoughtful reply. I want to answer some things but not as an argument so let me clarify that I take no offence in

your comments.

 

I mentioned that I did not want to dwell on my Canikon reasons because I know brand loyalties run fierce and can lead to

distracting debate. Also, that it can appear naive to reject brands irrationaly. I do of course have (personal) rationale but

would rather leave them out of the conversation. I prefer to start afresh with digital-era designed lenses. Lower weight fits in

more with my 40+ age and family lifestyle, having watched the market for a couple of years and picking up a few bodies to

see how they feel, I am comfortable holding the Olympus/Pentax brands. For price point and VFM the lenses of both

(Olympus in general and limited lenses for Pentax) have high reputations. Yes, shooting styles are important and personal

and mine is not particularly demanding which Gerry summed up well.

 

I agree it is surprising that with so much information around one can become confused. You try and filter out the marketing

and reject the sites that just don't educate you helpfully but when "you don't know what you don't know" and only really have

the web as your guide your eyes glaze. The phrase "Obviously familiar with" could sound a bit condescending to be honest,

I honestly don't want to be familiar with misleading and irrelevant sites/reviews.

 

The hub of the confusion is that as a new joiner in a fast moving technology market, it becomes difficult to differentiate

genuine development and actual performance capability from the marketing fluff and the user-induced problems which may

do digital an injustice. Especially when recognising that no manufacturer is there to sell photography, they are there to sell

product!

 

This is why I posted here. I know it is sponsored but nevertheless has always seemed to attract pros and other

photographers who have a nasty (healthy) habit of bringing the less experienced of us back to solid ground on the issues

that really matter.

 

It is why I value the replies and also why part of my question went beyond product A versus product B and into a more

general question of digital quality versus the technology I am previously familiar, my limited digital skirmish to date and the

whole issue of artefacts.

 

Please understand that with only digital disappointment to go by to date, sorting into relevant and irrelevant is not easy for

everyone. You are absolutely right that real pictures by real people is what matters most. The links in the responses are

exactly what is needed, as is looking at a field report like this

http://www.nwpphotoforum.com/ubbthreads/information/php/2007_Reviews/Isaac/Oly510Review.php

 

If I take all the replies as a whole, the messages appear to be that: all the major brands have developed into collective

competence; digital as a medium produces results which will not disappoint a film user; the scare of artefacts with DSLRs

comes from unrealistic pc viewing, a competent photographer can adapt to his/her choice.

[liteonphotography]

just a few words. excellent for the money but it all depends on the lens, and the photog themselves. I love oly and their new systems but others hate it. Good luck

[Tom Wiggins Photography]

The simple answer is the e520 will give you great pictures, in most conditions. I have taken pictures up to ISO800 with no problem. I beleive the recent issue of Popular Photography liked the image quality of the camera, but thought it could be easier to use. PCPhoto has an article on sensors. I have an e510, it replaced my e300, I wanted to get the IS feature. 10MP is plenty of pixels, the live MOS sensor was designed for low noise, and I don't find it at all difficult to use.

[randy_rogers1]

Paul, your previous experience using mid-level bodies with better lenses is also a good approach with Olympus system. You might consider the E510 / E520 and the Olympus 12-60. The 12-60 is clearly a step up from the kit lenses with improved optics, faster aperture, faster autofocus, and significantly better build quality. Since the E510 body is now discounted, the E510 / 12-60 combo will be very competitive (price / image quality) with anything currently in the market.

[paul_loader]

I ordered an E-510 yesterday with the twin lens kit and received it a couple of hours ago. It all feels much lighter than

the metal-brick era I am used to in both bodies and lenses but I appreciate the positive feel of the controls and many

aspects of smart design where camera design has evolved in the past 20 years. Exmaples are the reversible lens

hoods with the click-stop when fitting to use or to put away.

 

I doubt the kit lenses will be a waste even as hands down to my daughter in the future so better lenses will wait.

Simply looking forward to getting to know this package, forget about the technical arguments and produce the shots

I used to get with film and which others get with digital.

 

I must search photo.net for advice on uploading images as I have become used to doing so with easycapture to keep

file sizes small. Perfect for web shots such as writing wiki articles (coffee is my indulgence and I write articles from

time to time on coffee time www.coffeetimeuk.com ) but this level of image isn't really going to help on a forum like

this.

 

Thanks again. Happy shooting.

[dale_warren1]

I see you made the same decision I did. Just received my E-510 two-lens kit Friday (07-25-08). Took a while to

find the FORMAT for the card. LOL.

 

Decided to make the switch from film to digital SLR rather than investing more in lenses for my film camera.

Only having the one lens I ordered with the Canon Elan IIE allowed me to switch brands with no remorse. I do

plan on keeping the Canon. At least for the time being. Really like it, but digital is the only way to go today.

 

It seemed to me from my research that the E-510 was the best I could get with the funds I had. I am very excited

about my new toy! You know what they say about the difference between a man and a boy. Haha.

 

I would be interested in reading a follow up from you sometime in the near future. Are you satisfied with the

pictures from the 510? Is it easy to learn? Stuff like that. It seems like an awful steep learning curve to

me. I am use to inserting a roll of film, and firing away. Not only have to learn how to adjust all the

camera's settings, but how to post process also. That is scarier than learning the camera. No one ever accused

me of being a computer nerd. LOL.

 

Here's wishing us both luck with our new purchase.