lihong

<p>Thank you Mike! That's a very helpful piece of information.</p>

<p>Does anyone know that in terms of video, if the new olympus 14-150mm is as good as the panasonic 14-140mm, on a E-P1? I only tried 4/3 lenses so far, and during recording, the focusing noise could be recorded and it's quite loud. <br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>It's not that bad for non-professionals. I saw a few sample photos on the Olympus Japanese website and they look pretty good. What else do we expect? Maybe a better CMOS like the one used in GH2? And faster continuous autofocus? Or better high ISO sensitivity? I agree due to the inherited problem of small sensors, it's hard to beat APS-C in high ISO arena. However, autofocus function has a lot of room to improve. <br>

For an amateur like me, even E620 is enough. If we only look at image quality, even E-P1 is pretty good up to ISO800. The other day I posted a few test photos on a photo gear forum. Those were taken with E-P1 I just got and the 25mm f/1.4 lens (using adapter). People commented that they are of Leica quality. So I guess good lenses mean more than camera bodies, at least for not so demanding uses. The only thing that really bothers me is the price. $1700? It's crazy. I would buy an E-5 if the price drops below $1100. And that may take a couple of years, I guess. </p>

<p>I have owned both the same time at some point, but now I am down to just e-620. It's not because D90 is inferior, but because I own several nice 4/3rd lenses and e-620 is sufficient for my uses. The thing with 4/3rd format is that a lot of people look down upon it, just because of the smaller sensor. The same people would invariably put their eyes on full frame or larger sensors. But in my opinion, unless one needs poster size print out all the time, the extra money and weight of bigger sensor cameras are really not necessary. From my own experience, although D90 is a better camera in many aspects, like the focus aid lamp, faster autofocus, etc., the image quality under low range ISO settings is no better than that of E-620. And one can always use de-noise software to get rid of some noise. I also think that using Genuine Fractals, I may be able to print out much bigger images too. I never tried it, but I wonder if anybody tried this.</p>

<p>Thank you, guys! I still cannot make up my mind though. I will probably wait for a while. </p>

<p>Hello everyone, <br>

This forum seems cool down in the summer. I guess people are taking vacations with their gears and there is no time for many to post here :-). <br>

I have been thinking to buy a m4/3 camera for light use or traveling, but I found it is still quite hard to decide which one to pick after reading a bunch of reviews. I have narrowed it down to 3 choices: E-P2, E-PL1 and GF1. I have 4 olympus 4/3 lenses and one panasonic 4/3 lens for a E-620 body. So I inclined to exclude GF1, since autofocus function of most of these lenses will not work with it using an adaptor. Two other things I don't like GF1 are its JPEG off-color and no in-body image stabilization. Since E-P1 is a generation older, that leaves E-P2 and E-PL1. But these two are almost $300 difference. I don't know it worth it to buy an E-P2 over an E-PL1. I just wonder if somebody can give me a clue? I value IQ the most, and I can tolerate some inconveniences. <br>

Thank you very much!</p>

<p>My current carry-around lenses are 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5, 50mm f/2 and 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5. They are pretty much sufficient and they work great. I would say the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 definitely worth every penny I paid. It is just kind of heavy. The 11-22mm image quality is much better than 14-54mm I too (I am not sure about 14-54mm II).</p>

 

<p>Thank you guys! Now it's a relief to know that I don't have to spend money on a canon 5DII.<br>

Lihong</p>

<p>I understand that a 12MP image can be printed out very nicely at 8x10 inch (around 300 dpi). But are images from a larger sensor like D700 can be printed at a larger size, since the images could be smoother and less noisier?<br>

Right now I own a 12MP 4/3rd format camera, which has a sensor area about 1/4 of the one in D700. I just wonder if D700 will give me better resolution or larger print size. Or should I pick Canon 5D Mark II instead?<br>

Thanks!<br>

Lihong</p>

<p>By the way, Godfrey, I really like some photos on your personal website, especially a few in the folder of "people in situ". The one I like most is the first in that folder. It is so simple and so vivid, just story-telling.</p>

<p>Thank you Godfrey. You were right. I should focus on taking photos rather than hunting for magic lenses. <br>

On another note, I think, because 35mm is wider, its depth of field may be more suited to shoot subjects like flowers. Barrel distortion would not be a big problem then. I would love to see photos of similar subjects taken with these two lenses side-by-side.</p>

<p>I just came across the website lens-reviews.com and got curious to see what it says about 50mm f/2 macro, one of my favorite Zuiko lenses. To my surprise, contrary to other review sites and user reviews, this site says that the resolution of this lens is not as good as 35mm f/3.5 macro. Here is the quote:<br>

... The optical qualities of this lens are quite good. Resolution is reasonably high , although not as impressive as on its cheaper 35mm sibling. The centre remains good throughout and aperture choice has relatively little impact on optical quality. Edge performance is influenced by aperture selections and you see best results here at f/5.6 and f/8. How ever, for a macro lens, the resolution peaks for to early, the centre hitting its top spot between f/4 and f/5.6, and close-up works usually entail using smaller aperture then this....<br>

I wonder if anybody here has the first hand experience using both lenses and what do you think?<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>I have used both Olympus E-620 and Nikon D90 for a while. There are at least three things about E-620 still lag behind, based on my own experience:<br>

First is the notorious high ISO noise inherited to 4/3's smaller sensor, but this doesn't bother me much because I always like well-lit conditions.<br>

Second is the pixel level resolution. I tested this by focusing onto some small prints a few meters away, using the same focal length in terms of 35mm equivalent. Note here, I only have a couple of low end Nikon lenses, but my Olympus lenses are all high grades. But still, images from D90 are sharper, if default settings are used. I think Olympus still uses too much anti-aliasing, in contrast to D90's over-sharpening. This is still not a very big problem for me, because I can sharpen the images in photoshop, or in most cases the default sharpness is good enough.<br>

The third problem may be more troublesome. Maybe it's just my technique, but I feel it is easier to get the right or desired exposure using D90, if the normal area metering is used. Often I have to use bracketing when I use E-620.<br>

Because E-620 is just a wash-down version of E-30, I don't think E-30 will make a difference.<br>

In terms of focus, as you mentioned, D90 is definitely superior. <br>

All in all, I still like my E-620 and I still can get great photos out of it. It's just so convenient to use, and the swivel LCD is a very nice feature. And Olympus lenses are really good. With E-620, 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5, and 50mm f/2, you will have a great light travel kit. </p>

 

<p>Hi guys (and gals too :-)), what are your favorite lenses for your 4/3 system?<br>

I will start with myself. My favorite lenses so far are the 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5 and the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 SWD. I love the 50mm f/2 too. In fact, most lenses in my arsenal are pretty good.<br>

The only one I feel that does not live up to the expectation is the Panasonic Leica D Summilux 25mm f/1.4. I don't think it deserves the money I paid for and I wonder why it receives a unanimous praise from other users. I mean the bokeh is not great. I don't see it is sharper than my other Olympus high grade lenses. I keep wondering to myself, where is the Leica quality aside from the build quality?</p>

<p>Simply put, this lens is awesome for landscape!<br>

Since I got this lens recently when it was on sale, it has stayed on my E-620. I use the wide end whenever possible. I usually set the aperture to f/11 and the photos are sharp. Even f/16 is still pretty good. f/22 might be too soft. But I assume it is a rare occasion that one has to use aperture above f/11. Using aperture above f/11 will require higher ISO under most conditions, i.e. cloudy, windy, indoor, etc., which is not a favorable choice because of the inherited high noise problem of 4/3 format at higher ISO.<br>

 

<p>I don't see distortion.</p>

<br>

Colors are accurate, as long as the right white balance settings are chosen. I didn't see color aberration.<br>

One problem I encountered is lens flare. Under certain conditions, lens flares are pretty bad. I guess this might be common for all wide angle lens. The hood does not help, and at 11mm end, part of the hood is visible through the viewfinder. </p>

<div></div>

<p>Fixed!!! After calling Nikon, the tech support guy suggested me to reset custom settings. I did, but nothing happened. So I started to package the camera. After unscrewed the lens, I removed the battery when the camera was still on. You know normally one would remove the battery when the camera is off. Then a strange thought got in me. I decided to put back the battery and a lens. Suddenly, the autofocus works again!! It must be a miracle!</p>

<p>Thank you all for you input. I did as you suggested, but nothing could fix the problem. So I will call Nikon.</p>

<p>My D90 suddenly lost its autofocus function. I checked the camera, and made sure all relevant buttons on the body and the lenses were set to autofocus, but still it displayed manual on the info screen. I wonder if somebody could help me out. I want to make sure that I did not make some stupid mistake before I send it back to Nikon for repair. Thanks a lot!</p>

<p>This lens only performs well when the lighting conditions are really good, like under bright sun light.</p>

<p>Pat, you have some really nice photos. On the first page of your flicker site, the photo of the snowy landscape taken with E-620 is underexposed though. So it is hard to compare with those taken with D90. But I still think it is better in terms of color. The raw from D90 looks washed out. <br>

I am waiting for E-5 too! I hope it will debut this year.</p>

<p>I have a similar experience and maybe similar frustrations too. <br>

I was not happy with the image quality of my old E-510 last year and bought a Nikon D90 last fall. I got some really nice fall foliage and landscape photos with D90. I think it is a quite good camera, but not perfect. Of course, nothing is perfect.<br>

Last winter, I sold the old E-510 and upgraded to E-620. That is a huge improvement. In most respects, E-620 and D90 are comparable. The resolution, dynamic range and high ISO performance of E-620 are pretty good. One thing I really love E-620 is its color accuracy. And since I have a lot more good lenses for olympus system, now most of the time, I still use E-620. The D90 is a backup, especially for low light condition. <br>

Nikon tends to give over-vivid color if Jpeg is used and sometime I feel there are color casts under certain conditions. These may be good for shooting the fall colors though. E-620 seems more accurate, which may be better for other occasions. I will use E-620 next fall and compare side-by-side with D90.<br>

I guess it is not because one camera is much better than the other. It is just my personal preference. Because I have been using olympus for a long time, I may have developed a nostalgic feeling towards it. I always remind myself not to fall in love with my gears, because at the end of a shooting day, what really counts is the quality of my photos.<br>

It often makes me laugh to see some people fall in the tricks of one manufacturer and become its fans. There are many Leica fans in this world. But practically speaking, I don't see their photos are much better than other camera users. Sometime, they talk about the so called "german flavor". But when they show their photos, they just make me laugh, "What the hell!". And how many pros are really using leica day by day? Those cameras mostly become luxury collections.</p>

<p>Hi Greg,<br>

Thank you for the suggestion! I didn't know the external flash has that capability. That's awesome!</p>

<p>Yeah, I tried popping up the flash. It's very annoying and still not as efficient as an AF-assist lamp.</p>

<p>I got an E-620 recently and have tried it on various subjects including landscapes, pet portraits and macros. My first impression was that this camera is definitely a big step improvement over E-510. Two major things really improved are pixel level resolution and high ISO noise. In addition, dynamic range and white balance seem much better too. Besides, when shooting jpeg, the colors are accurate in most situations, especially at outdoor. Overall I am very happy with the IQ. And for its price, I got many features I cannot get from other makes. <br>

The body is quite compact. Holding it in my hands, it feels a little small and not ergonomic at first. But once I got used to it, it was just fine. In fact, it feels quite solid compared to Nikon D90 or Canon 50D, which are supposed to be midrange cameras similar to Olympus E-30. D90 and 50D are larger, but they don't have the feel of solid construction. 50D especially gives me the plastic feel. But this is just my own bias I guess.<br>

One thing needs a serious improvement is autofocus under low light. Even the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 lens still hunts a lot and often ends up at the wrong focus. This will make indoor portraits of kids and pets very difficult. I wish there is a focus aid light on the camera. I really don't see why Olympus always omit it in its low end cameras.</p>

 

<p>I got the E-620 body today and tested it after dinner, side-by-side with a Nikon D90. I was using 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 on E-620 and the cheap 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR on D-90. I mainly tested at 28mm and 50mm (35mm equivalent), which mark the range that my old E-510 did not perform well in terms of resolution.<br>

I am really happy with the result. E-620 is definitely a big step improvement over E-510 in terms of resolution and usable ISO. Although the resolution is still not as good as D90, it is really close. Up to ISO1600, the photos are still acceptable when they are enlarged.<br>

And I love the art filters, especially the pinhole and the grainy film. <br>

The only thing I don't like E-620 is its size. It is too small and not ergonomic. When the 14-54mm lens was attached, I always felt that it was going to slip out of my hands. I guess if I need to attach the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 lens, I have to buy the battery handle.</p>