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

[tomorrowstreasures]

You'd definitely have no problems with a D300

Shot hand-held with a D300 and 50mm 1.4

that image was amazing! It would look really cool as an hdr too!

[tirediron]

that image was amazing! It would look really cool as an hdr too!

Thanks!

ISO 1000, 1/50, f10 (Why f10 you ask? I have NO idea! )

[Lovin]

You took that one on manual or aperture priority ?

[tirediron]

You took that one on manual or aperture priority ?

It was shutter priority; what I meant was: I have no idea why I didn't notice my aperture was so needlessly high and dial down the other settings.

[Michaelaw]

My first ever digital camera was an Agfa 2.3 mp that blew up a month or two after I bought it....Worst camera in the known universe but it was only $200.00 and change. Next, a friend gave me a Minolta Dimage 4 mp and that hooked me but it was basically a point and shoot. I decided to buy a DSLR but had a lot of trouble swallowing the price tags of the Nikon's and Canons. I then found an Olympus E-500 8 mp camera with a two lens kit for $799.00 new and went for it. The old 500 was missing stuff like live view (which I rarely use) and OIS so I eventually moved up to the E-510 10.1 mp. Had I not been impressed with my 500, I would have probably jumped over to Nikon or Canon right there but I was hooked on the Oly line and still am. I've moved into the E-3 now and love it. Iv'e never had a speck of dust on a shot made with any of the E-system cameras, never had a failure in three years. The E-3 has gotten very wet at times as I shoot in the rain a lot. The E-3 articulating LCD is awesome,, no more laying on the ground to get that low shot. I've had one stuck pixel on the E-3 sensor but I ran pixel mapping on the camera and it's gone. I also have two remote flash heads, an FL-36r and an FL-50r which can be controlled wireless from the camera. The 4/3 system gives outstanding quality and sharpness edge to edge of the image. If you want to shoot high ISO images up to 3200 a lot, you may want to fork out for the Nikon as the OLY E-3 really doesn't like Much past 1600. I've seen some very good work at ISO 2000. For me, the E-3 is a truly outstanding camera at a reasonable price and you can't beat Zuiko glass either for quality or price. I won't lie though....If I had ten grand sitting around, I'd be picking up a Nikon D700, I know the body is only 4 grand, but I'd need my preferred three lens's too. Nope, I'm sticking with my E-3 for a good long while yet

[Lovin]

Thank you, Michaelaw.

[masp]

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

Hmm, too bad that link seems to be down. Pentax's 98% tranmission is a very interesting factoid though.

Being able to rent lenses, equipment or bodies is handy though, I imagine this is another reason why pros favor Canon and Nikon. The quality of the particular body is important, but it seems that the market is so competitive now that everything in this area is close to even.