E-600 owners, how does it compare to the E-620?

[t._masp]

<p>I did some research and it seems like the E-600 is almost the same as the E-620, with the exception of the double exposure feature and a few art filters. For $130 less, the refurbished E-600 seems like a good deal, but I wanted to double check to see if I missed anything else.</p>

<p>Also, where do all these refurbed E-600 cameras come from? Just wondering if they are just QVC overstock or customer returns or something else...</p>

[dan_moore5]

<p>I can't compare to the 620 because I only have a 600, but it does everything I need and more. Mine was a similar deal to yours, and I'm very happy with it. Off the top of my head, one feature it lacks that the 620 has is back-lit buttons.</p>

 

[rdm]

<p>Hey Dan , was your e-600 a refurbished one or did you get it new?</p>

[dan_moore5]

<p>refurbished</p>

[rdm]

<p>Dan, I'm still considering the E-600 as a new digital mother for all my Minolta Glass. Maybe you can help me decide. I thought about emailing you but maybe by posting here it could also help others that are thinking the same thing. I don't want to spend allot of money mainly because i don't have allot. So i see 2 refurbished cameras. One with one kit lens (14-45) for $430 and one with a two lens kit (14-45, 40-150) for $510. SO i was deciding between the two, got the 400 and i was going to finance the rest on a card. But then i been getting told by allot of people that i should go micro four thirds. Telling me its better for old manual lenses. I found a place that has a new open box DMC-G1 with one kit lens (14-45) selling for $505. Is focusing really that much worse on the SLR than it would be on the micro four thirds? For the money i think i would like to have the built in IS.<br /> What would you suggest i get Dan?</p>

[meissner]

<p>The viewfinder on Olympus DSLRs is much smaller than that on classic film cameras, mostly due to the Olympus sensor being 1/4 the size (each linear dimension is 1/2 size, so the total area is 1/4 the size). The E-400 was the last of the pre-live view cameras (with the Kodak sensor), so you only have the optical view finder to focus with manual lenses. On the newer cameras, you have the option of using live view to focus on the LCD, and there is a mode which you can move the square to a part of the scene, and then magnify the image 5-10 times. This is great for focusing on a tripod, but is not the best for focusing hand held. The E-4xx and E-5xx cameras did not have any magnification in the VF (the more expensive E-3/E-30 do magnify the VF, which can help quite a bit with manual focusing).</p>

<p>The E-P2 and E-PL1 with the electronic viewfinder (standard on E-P2 and optional on E-PL1) allows you to focus like you would with a film camera, and you can have the image magnified.</p>

<p>The G-1 has an electronic viewfinder builtin. I don't use Panasonic cameras, but I imagine it has an option to enlarge the focusing.</p>

[dan_moore5]

<p>I really can't suggest anything. I know that my Minolta lenses work on my E-600. They actually work better than I expected. As Michael points out, the viewfinder is small, especially when compared to my X-700. I was worried about that. But in practice, both cameras are showing the image at 100%, and when focusing I'm usually concentrating on the thing I'm focusing on and not the whole frame, so any individual element appears the same size basically. It works better than I expected it would. Using the adapter is pretty easy, though the adapters to Micro 4/3 should be even easier because I don't believe they need the allen screw to hold the Minolta lens.<br>

That said I've never used, held, or even seen a G-1 in person. I'm sure it's a great camera, and has some advantages and some disadvantages as compared to the E-600. I can't possibly begin to make a suggestion. All I can say is that I'm happy with my E-600, and that G-1 owners appear happy with their cameras too. I doubt you'll really go wrong.</p>