Nikon-Canon, Nikon-Canon, but what about Olympus?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lovin

I already searched on internet some reviews about Olympus E3, and it seems that E3 is better than Nikon D300, up to ISO 800. The stabilization system in E3 makes the shooting way easy, like zooming at max and your hand shaking very smooth, you can take the picture with no problem.
Now, the dust reduction is the best on Olympus, E3 got also 11 full twin-cross points, and many other features.
I saw professional photographers using E3 in studious, Eli Reeds has an E3 for his outdoor assignments (wow).
My concern about what to choose, was because in every magazine about photography they recommend Nikon, Canon, and now also Pentax (because of the new line), Sony but not Olympus. Like Olympus should be your last choice. And I said to myself : what is wrong with Olympus ?
And that's why I was so confused.
Because the software from my E500 it's not working properly ( I can't update firmware) I'm afraid that maybe I can't use lenses from the new line.
I want to buy a lens, but what if it's not working?
Also, I'm starting saving money for a new camera, and my target still is the E3, and it costs a lot of money (for me) - $1,799 - body.

My priorities are landscapes, urban and later portraits.

Thank you for your advices Tirediron,
and thank you all for your advices !

Now it's better, I'll stick to Olympus, until I'll be so good that I'll need a Nikon D3 :) lol long long way :)

---

The bulk of your research seems to be directed towards the body. IMO the current body should equal maybe 25% of your research. Choosing a system should really represent the difference. The body is often obsolete by the time you've saved up for it.

How many lenses are available (new and on the used market)?

What is the range of the lenses? Can you go 500mm if you want to? Macro? Tilt shift for your landscapes?

How do these lenses hold their value?

How quickly can you get rid of them?

Does the system you are eye balling have a comprehensive flashing system?

When sports pro's started moving to Nikon because of Canon autofocus issue's they were able to dump their sack full of lenses on the market, get good value on them, and sell them quickly.

When 3rd party lens makers like Sigma introduce a new 70-200 2.8 what mounts do you think are issued first?.... Canon, Nikon... then wait a while... Pentax... then wait more and maybe Olympus....

When 3rd party software developers release software and/or updates I can guarantee you the Olympus Raw developer will not be included until a later patch is out..

Want a Stofen flash diffuser for your flash head? Your local camera shop will most likely be stocking the Canon and Nikon.... but back of the bus on the order list if you want one for Olympus. Frustrating if you shoot on a daily or frequent basis.

This is why (to answer your original question) many pro's/amateurs stick with Canon and Nikon.

You can make great images with any of the systems (as Tirediron mentioned). IMO it's more about each systems strengths and weaknesses and how they suit up to your style and needs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjeling

Not only that, they transmit 98% of all light coming through the lens. Higher than any other camera lens manufacturer. This is from their time spent focused solely on optical systems and means a more sharp and vivid image. It is easily noticeable when comparing them to other brands. A

---

I never see light transmission as a commonly measured aspect. Care to share some reference sources?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lovin

I already searched on internet some reviews about Olympus E3, and it seems that E3 is better than Nikon D300, up to ISO 800. The stabilization system in E3 makes the shooting way easy, like zooming at max and your hand shaking very smooth, you can take the picture with no problem.
Now, the dust reduction is the best on Olympus, E3 got also 11 full twin-cross points, and many other features.
I saw professional photographers using E3 in studious, Eli Reeds has an E3 for his outdoor assignments (wow).
My concern about what to choose, was because in every magazine about photography they recommend Nikon, Canon, and now also Pentax (because of the new line), Sony but not Olympus. Like Olympus should be your last choice. And I said to myself : what is wrong with Olympus ?
And that's why I was so confused.
Because the software from my E500 it's not working properly ( I can't update firmware) I'm afraid that maybe I can't use lenses from the new line.
I want to buy a lens, but what if it's not working?
Also, I'm starting saving money for a new camera, and my target still is the E3, and it costs a lot of money (for me) - $1,799 - body.

My priorities are landscapes, urban and later portraits.

Thank you for your advices Tirediron,
and thank you all for your advices !

Now it's better, I'll stick to Olympus, until I'll be so good that I'll need a Nikon D3 :) lol long long way :)

---

It would seem as though you’ve already sold yourself on the E3 or E30 and that’s all well and good especially if you already have a bag full of Oly lenses and media cards compatible with those models. I think the old saying goes something like “You dance with the one that brought you”.

I would like to see the link to a review that indicates the E3 is better than the D300 in the ISO ranges you mentioned. Everything I’ve seen contradicts that assertion. In fact, I haven’t seen it said anywhere that the E3 is as good as or better than even the D90 in terms of high ISO performance.

Anyway, no big deal. Something that did make me scratch my head was the comment that the lens is the most important part of the system. You’d have gotten no argument from me in the day of film, but with the differences in technology among the many manufactures today I’d be more inclined to believe that it’s at least a 50-50 proposition.

In the late ‘80s if you had dropped identical rolls of film in the three best bodies available at the time and put the same lens (for the sake of argument let’s say a Sigma 24mm 2.8) on those bodies with the setting matched a closely as possible, you might not have seen any appreciable difference the quality of the respective images produced by those three brands. But today, if you put that same model lens from Sigma on the EOS-40D, D300, and E3 and tried to match their settings, I expect you would be able to see an appreciable difference in the quality of the respective images produced by those three brands. The best glass available attached to a D40 won’t give you the same image as it will if attached to the D3x. Today’s sensors are yesterday’s film and they’re not all created equally.

Someone help me out here. If there’s a flaw in that logic, I need to know what it is so I’m not laboring under false impressions.

Ok, first the link for Barefoot:
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ol..._results.shtml

Indeed the lenses are not everything, but when you can get a good lens cheaper than Nikkor or Canon it's a good deal.
But, now after last 2-3 posts I think that Nikon or Canon are better options.
I think I'll go for a Nikon D300 (if is not too "high" for me).
Today I was wondering , for example, me and my wife wanna go next year to Brazilian Carnival, and my question is if I could take pictures of the dancers at 9:00 PM without needing a tripod? I mean at a higher ISO to choose a faster shutter speed. With E3 I have some doubts, but I guess that with a D300 or a Canon (I don't know which one - I know nothing about Canon) it wouldn't be a problem.

I'll study Canon also. So far Nikon looks like Gods camera(for me) :) because I know this brand since I was a child, I mean I know about their tradition. But now I found out that actually Canon got huge tradition as well.

Anyway I'll keep searching until I'll have the money.
Any advices are welcome anytime !


Thank you again!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lovin

...
Today I was wondering , for example, me and my wife wanna go next year to Brazilian Carnival, and my question is if I could take pictures of the dancers at 9:00 PM without needing a tripod?

---

You'd definitely have no problems with a D300

Shot hand-held with a D300 and 50mm 1.4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tirediron

You'd definitely have no problems with a D300

Shot hand-held with a D300 and 50mm 1.4

---

Very nice shot. Do you recall the ISO setting?

I’m curious. In the link provided by Lovin, I noticed that Camera Labs made it perfectly clear that the D300 was made to perform more like the E3 by having it produce 4:3 shaped images with 10.8 Megapixel resolution rather than the 12.3 Megapixel, 3:2 shaped images it would normally shoot.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen this methodology employed in reviews. Did doing this have an impact on the quality of the image that D300 users typically enjoy?

Travis, unfortunately the figure I had given cannot get backed up through Pentax's website. It was some information about lenses my instructor had given me sheet in a recreational photography class I took last year. I especially remember it being an exciting fact being a pentax owner. Anyways, I did a google search as 'pentax 98% light transmission' and it brought several links up. Didnt look too far but found this and several others like it. Not that you would be familiar with it, but he owns two stores, Castle Photo, so I gave him some credibility. He was a Nikon guy himself, but admitted to pentax having the best lenses. He said minolta or someone else had lenses that transmitted the same percentage as well, only remember pentax since i am an owner.

http://www.telescopeshop.co.uk/en-gb/dept_160.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barefoot

Very nice shot. Do you recall the ISO setting?

I’m curious. In the link provided by Lovin, I noticed that Camera Labs made it perfectly clear that the D300 was made to perform more like the E3 by having it produce 4:3 shaped images with 10.8 Megapixel resolution rather than the 12.3 Megapixel, 3:2 shaped images it would normally shoot.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen this methodology employed in reviews. Did doing this have an impact on the quality of the image that D300 users typically enjoy?

---

I think they just crop off the sides on the D300 so the image appears uniform with the 4:3 format

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barefoot

Very nice shot. Do you recall the ISO setting?

---

Thanks - Not off hand; you should be able to pull the EXIF data off of the image (I can't do that at work)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barefoot

I’m curious. In the link provided by Lovin, I noticed that Camera Labs made it perfectly clear that the D300 was made to perform more like the E3 by having it produce 4:3 shaped images with 10.8 Megapixel resolution rather than the 12.3 Megapixel, 3:2 shaped images it would normally shoot.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen this methodology employed in reviews. Did doing this have an impact on the quality of the image that D300 users typically enjoy?

---

Interesting; I know nothing about this. Apparently more research is required. Tks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tirediron

One consideration with the 4/3 format is the crop factor. It's 2:1 vice 1.5:1, so your 50mm lens gives a FOV equivalent to that of a 100mm lens on a full-frame sensor.

---

TI - would you be interested in showing some images that would illustrate what these numbers mean? I am a visual learner and soooo do not get it. :(