glenbarrington

This has plenty to do with digital photography. The digital darkroom needs protection.

I don't know what you mean by 'makes'. Canyou be more explicit?

I see no one has really addressed the dynamic range issue of the Olympus cameras. In my experience, the default jpg settings in the Oly DSLRs seem to be set to be a bit 'punchier' than most serious photographers would want. I assume that is to attract digital P&S users whose idea of a 'good picture' may be skewed by their experiences with Digital P&S.

 

However, I've had no significant problems with raw (ORF) files and even the jpg default settings can be altered to produce most pleasing results with my E500.

Both are excellent cameras. The E410 has live view and is smaller and lighter in weight. Has 10 megapixels The older (and I assume discontinued) E500 has probably been Olympus' most popular DSLR to date, no live view, excellent IQ, a bit larger/heavier than the E410. and has 'only' 8 megapixels.

 

If you don't need the Live View, the E500 represents an excellent value now that it is on close-out. It's still pretty competitive with the competition, and the increase from 8 to 10 mp is not a major jump. I have the E500 2 lens kit and couldn't be happier with it.

Go to the File menu selection and select either "Import Photos from Disk" (i.e. HD, CD, etc) or "Import Photos from Device" (i.e. Camera, scanner, card reader etc), answer the questions in the pop-up window and hit (if I recall correctly), "OK"

What's wrong with PSE6? True, it isn't much different from PSE5, but I'd hardly call it BAD. And you can legally buy PSE5 for around $50 USD from a lot of internet software sellers. I use softwareoutlet.com for that sort of thing, and never had a problem with them or registering any software I bought from them.

 

But any editor with layers (some editors call them objects) will pretty much do what you are looing for. Serif PhotoPlus is good (both the free and 'pay for' versions) ACDSee's Standalone editor (ineptly named 'Editor V4.0') is good and has the advantage of being a full fledged 8 or 16 bit editor as well.

 

Gimp is free and has quite a following, but I never liked it much.

 

When you say Corel, it depends on WHICH Corel editor you are talking about. They seem intent on buying up all the serious competition to Adobe they can find. They sell their original editor 'PhotoPaint' with the Corel Graphics Suite. They sell PaintShopPro (Formerly the Jasc Paint Shop Pro), and recently bought the Ulead company and now sell their PhotoImpact (Which if I recall, started out with the same original sourcecode as Adobe Photoshop).

 

All of the ones I mentioned will do the job you are looking for and have the advantage of being significantly cheaper than Photoshop CS3. Choice of an editor is really a very personal thing, I suggest downloading 2 or 3 free trials and find out which ones suit you the best.

I never could get comfortable with Gimp. But I am now at the stage where I really want a good 16 bit editor and It just doesn't have that, so I'm not a good candidate for it anyway.

 

As far as raw being a fad, I don't think so. It's just too darned useful. At least to me anyway. But the proper software IS essential for that. (for me, Lightroom)

I should think so, as long as no moisture (even from condensation) get inside.

My wife has an all black desk and her optical mouse just can't function on it. Our results are similar to what you describe. We have found that we need to have something with a pattern to it, so we use a mouse with a photo on it.

 

I guess these things work by recognizing the differences in what lies below them so an all black desk can't register enough of a difference to matter to the mouse.

 

Me? I use a Wacom tablet with the Wacom mouse and pen. Works great for me.

I for one, would never go back to film. Digital has revealed to me a whole new level of photography and I'm a better photographer for it. But the choice of tools is such a highly personal and individual choice that no one can make this decision for you.

 

I suspect you already know what you need to do and you are hoping someone here will write something to validate that choice. Go with your gut feeling. It's only a camera in either case.

There is one last difference between the E410 and the E510. The E510 uses a larger and

more robust battery. While the E410 battery is going to be good enough for most people

and situations, people who may find themselves in situations where battery life is critical

would be advised to buy a second battery if they decide on the E410 over the E510

I thought Harjinder's answer was a bit vague in one area. The PanaLeica lenses when used on Olympus cameras can adjust the aperture electronically, the same way Olympus lenses do it.

Technically, there is no crop factor since the lenses are designed specifically and exclusively for 4/3s. Those lenses will only work with Olympus and the Pansonic/Leica bodies.

 

I'm less certain about the Sigma lenses for 4/3s. For them I think a it is correct to talk about a crop factor.

I love my E500 and the 40 - 150 kit lens is a real gem. Though the new 40 - 150 is supposed to be just as good, I really like the lens I have, pretty darned good for a kit lens.

 

I was a bit less thrilled with the 14 - 45 mm kit lens. While still in the acceptable to good category, it is not in the same league as the 40 - 150. I've upgraded to the 14 - 54 and I am also extremely happy with it. It is sharper with better contrast, it is faster focusing, and that extra f/stop makes the E500 handle much better in low light.

 

The link below is to a photo I took with the 40 - 150 that I am particularly proud of and shows just how sharp the lens can be.

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/6050975

As a Lightroom user, I would not buy CS3 for $300. My $50 copy of Elements V5 couples quite well with LR and I feel no need to spend an extra 250 for the same editing power I already have.

 

I know CS3 does more stuff, but I seriously doubt that I would actually USE that extra stuff. I consider Lightroom my main photo software and the editor is an adjuct to it.

 

The thing is, to make the right decision for you, you need to know what it is you are likely to need from a software package and a beginner isn't likely to be at that point.

Antony,

 

The 50mm f/2 is a wonderful lens. Not only great for macro shots, but a good focal length for traditional portraits as well. Remember, that 50mm in 4/3s is roughly equivalent to a 100mm in a 35 mm film camera.

 

You need to buy the tools that are right for you. and no one can tell you where photography will take YOU! And you may not know where you are headed until you get there. That's the beauty of an artistic mind set.

 

Personally, I'm a zoom kind of guy becasue I have learned I need flexibility. (note from my response above, that my memory is flexible too!) So my bias is towards more flexiblity. That doesn't mean I'm right, just biased.

 

Buy the lens, if it calls to you. And learn to use it well.

Eric and ALL! I've embarasssed myself completely! I double checked that photo and I DID shoot it with the 40 - 150! What makes it worse, is that I've shown that photo a couple of other times as an example of the 14 - 54! I wonder how many people have caught that discrepancy and just thought I was nuts? (as opposed to delusional, I guess)

 

As that great New York philosopher, Emily Latella, used to say, 'Never Mind!'

Antony, I am surprised that you feel the 14 - 54 is little better than a kit lens. That has not been my experience when comparing to the 14 - 45 that came with my E500. I feel it is sharper and has better contrast. It also focuses faster. Certainly, that extra f/stop makes the E500 handle much better in low light.

 

I don't believe I could have gotten this photo with the 14 - 45:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/6050975

Personally, I'd back them up off-line to CD or DVD, keep them for a set period of time. Say 2 - 5 years, in case the customer wants something special that jpgs aren't appropriate for, and then trash them.

There is a 50/f2.0 Zuiko and a 30/f1.4 Sigma both in native 4/3s mount, but to my knowledge, there is no 50/f1.4.

The Olympus kit lenses are better than most kit lenses from other manufacturers. (not bad - a good start for a beginner) But no manufacturer offers really top notch kit lenses.

 

I bought the 14-54 new for $350 USD about 9 months ago for my E500, and I am extremely happy with it. It is sharper, faster, and faster focusing than the kit lenses. And because it is a full f/stop faster than the kit lenses, it makes my E500 handle MUCH better in low light.

Oly Studio is kind of slow. . .BUT many people claim it provides the best colors for Oly cameras. I've never seen that myself. I mean it has good color but it is nothing 'special' in my eyes.

 

Lightroom is also kind of slow, but it has superb workflow and Raw conversions, and it will integrate practically seamlessly with not only your Adobe photo editor, but most any editor on the market.. It'll run you around $300 USD

 

A CS3 upgrade will allow you the same Lightroom quality raw conversion, but it's organizational and presentation capabilities are limted compared to LR. On the otherhand, it is a true 16 bit editor, neither of which Studio or Lightroom are. If you shop around, you are likely to find an upgrade deal for significantly less than $300 USD.

 

Which is right for you? Beats me. Three valid options

If I recall, the sensor is about 15% smaller than the APS sized sensors found in the small format Nikon and Canon DSLRs. Earlier in in the 4/3s evolution, this was enough difference to see a significant difference in image noise between 4/3s and the 'Canikon' offerings at higher ISO settings. However, this has largely been resolved.

 

Image quality performance with the current 4/3s cameras is extremely competiive with othe small format DSLRs. And while we haven't seen any samples or reports of the new Olympus E3's image quality from regular everyday photographers (not due out until end of November, early December), the reports from advanced showings indicate that the E3 will raise the bar on small format DSLR Image quality.

 

Even if the E3 doesn't imporve IQ at all from the E410 and E510, the IQ issues for 4/3s are largely over. You should judge 4/3s and its suitability for your needs on other issues.

 

Take a look at what an older 4/3s camera (The E500)can do by looking at my portfolio.

 

I'll probably stay with 4/3s

EricA, I agree with you in the absolute sense. A Lightroom user IS going to need a good editor at some point.

 

However, it is my personal belief that LR will reduce the need many people will have to move up to CS3. I think Lightroom (or a competitor) will eventually become the keystone graphics software purchase for many, if not most, photographers. With Lightroom, a good mid level editor (Such as PSE or PSP) becomes viable for many more phototgraphers than before.

 

So in that sense, I think LR does compete with CS3.

I'm surprised people use these services as a back-up solution. I personally use Smugmug, but just don't trust any of them to store my photos. I'd rather have a CD or a DVD burned than trust some 3rd party.