PDA

View Full Version : E-500 Questions



lunaris
07-01-2006, 08:25 AM
Hi everyone,

I'm getting ready for my first dSLR and I am tormenting myself what to get. My budget is limited, which will subsequently also limit the selection of the camera/lenses I can buy. I had an eye on the upcoming Panasonic L1, but it's announced price is beyond what I want/can spend. So back to the decision making. My budget is around 1200-1400 USD (less is better of course, if I can stay under 1000 USD that would be great) and it must cover camera, lens, memory card, warranty and maybe an extra battery, although that one I could get later.

I am looking at:
1) Evolt E-500 with the 2 lens kit
2) Canon XT with the lens kit

I ruled out the E-330 because of the price. I just think the image quality is better with the Canon and quite equal to the E-500. I do not want a camera with 6MP when there are 8MP cameras around, which rules out Minolta, Pentax, and Nikon in that price range. I know those 2 MB won't make a big difference, but it will give me more room to crop and still print 8x10 inch photos or even slightly bigger.

I try to look at as many photos made with the 2 Cameras that are on my list as possible. When the light conditions are good, both perform equally well (IMO). However, when the light conditions are not as nice, for example harsh light, it seems the Canon is better. The E-500 seems to have problems with keeping detail in highlights. I'm not too concerned about the "Jaggies" mentioned in many reviews, since they are not a big issue in a printed photo (I tested it with the photo samples), the clipped highlights however are an issue.

When you go to this site: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM and select the E-500 and compare it to the Canon you will see what I'm talking about. In the first portrait photo (sunlight) the highlights are blown out with the E-500 - no detail left (look at the nose and some areas of the white blouse), while they still contain detail with the Canon. I also tried this comparison with the Panasonic FZ20 (which I have), and it shows more detail in highlight than the E-500. Of course the FZ20 has other issues, like more noise.

What I'm wondering about is the performance when using Raw. All the photos I'm seeing are jpegs, nothing mentioned that they have been shot as raw files and then converted later on. On the site above the author increases the exposure by 0.7 EV, which will of course not help when a camera has some issues with highlights in the first place. On another site the author uses -0.3 to -0.7 EV to keep highlights in check (http://wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/e500-rev.html). So this might help with keeping detail in highlight areas. What I cannot find is a comparison of the same shot between jpeg and raw. Will the highlight details be preserved in Raw files? If that's the case, I would probably go for the E-500.

A friend of mine has the 2 lens E-500 kit. She loves it. She is a big Olympus fan, uses those cameras since the pre digital days. So I will be able to get some hands on experience one of these days.

What makes the E-500 so attractive for me is the price. You get a lot for your money. The Canon XT is now also available for a good price, the kit lens is supposed to be OK at best. But lenses can be replaced later on. And good lenses cost money, no matter if they are from Canon or Olympus. I also like the fact that it is a light camera. I bring my cameras with me all the time, and I am honestly not interested in schlepping a heavy camera with me. I also love shooting with my vintage cameras, especially my Zeiss Ikon (medium format folder from 1937), so this one comes with me a lot also. So weight is def. one of the factors that will make or breal a deal for me.

To end this long post, what I would like to hear from Evolt users here is their own expertience with the highlight issues I mentioned above. Do you have some raw vs jpeg comparisons? How do you circumvent/avoid clipped highlights (if possible at all)? I know at some point every camera will produce blown out highlights. I'm not talking about extreme situation here, more like the situation we have in the first link with the sunlight portrait.

Thanks for you patience, and I'm looking forward to some answers.

Sabine

kgosden
07-01-2006, 09:56 AM
While the highlights do seem blown out a bit in the E-500 the overall exposure also seems to be different enough from the XT to acount for much of that. I have had my E-500 for a few months and I am quite happy with it. I looked at the Nikon and Canon as well. While I really liked the Nikon the slightly lower resolution and SD media were minuses for me (I had a pretty good collection of CF and only a little SD). I did not care for the XT mainly due to the lack of spot metering and the higher price.

lunaris
07-01-2006, 10:42 AM
kgosden, thanks for your reply.

While the highlights do seem blown out a bit in the E-500 the overall exposure also seems to be different enough from the XT to acount for much of that.
Can you be a bit more specific what you mean by this?

Yes, the lack of spotmetering bites a bit, and the fact that there is no focusing aid for manual focussing (but the E-500 doesn't have that either, right?).

kgosden
07-01-2006, 03:43 PM
Overall the entire E-500 sunlight portrait seems about 1 stop more exposed than the XT version. The shadows and eyes on the XT bversion seem too dark to me. Of course, you can generally rescue shadows more than highlights.

Rodster
07-18-2006, 09:01 PM
I've had my E-500 for about three weeks now, and I absolutely love it. I went through a very similar comparison/debate on which camera to purchase as my first DSLR (I've had 5 other compact digitals over four years). My last camera was the Minolta Dimage A2, which was very feature packed, but not nearly the image quality I was looking for. With about $1,100 to spend on a camera outfit I soon realized, just as Sabine noted, that the best overall value options on the table were the Rebel XT and the E-500. But after taking the "math" a step further, the price differences were much greater between the two cameras than at first glance.

I took my own memory card to stores and took pictures with both the XT and the E-500 on several occasions to compare the results at home for myself. Yes, the Canon takes a noticeably better picture. But I just didn't like the way it felt in my hands - cheap. I also kept accidentally pressing the timer activation button with my right thumb; the button is near the upper right corner of the rear display, a natural place for your right thumb to rest. I activated the timer at least once every time I used the camera. Also, that 18-55 lense is just plain cheap. I saw it for $90, and with the price of Canon lenses, what does that tell you? So that means I'd be looking at at least $400 for a second Canon lens, just to get by with day-to-day shooting; so now the price is up to $1,199, and I still don't have a memory card (not to mention filters, flash, etc.).

So I decided to purchase the E-500 two lens kit. The camera fits very nicely in my hands. The lenses are terrific for every day use. I am very pleased with the sharpness of my images. I have taken 200 photos in three weeks, and I am very pleased with the balance of lighting in all of my photos. I shot a play last week at 1000 iso with the metering on spot, and the images turned out fabulous - well balanced and colorful with minimal noise. I have also taken a few outdoor nature shots with the macro on both lenses with excellent results. I have a 2 gig compact flash card, so I shoot everything in raw. I am beta testing Adobe's Lightroom software, which has fantastic controls for working with raw images (a definite purchase item when the final version hits the street). Lighting is a problem when both your lenses are f 3.5-4.5, so I purchased the Olympus FL-50 flash, wich also does a fine job.

The bottom line? I purchased the two lens E-500, a 2 gig Lexar memory card, the FL-50 flash, 3 filters, a bag and a lens cleaner for $1200, and I'm set - for a long time. And I haven't encountered any blowout or clipping issues nearly as dramatic as I saw in the photo comparisons online. If you are at least a moderately experienced amateur photographer, I think you'll truly be thrilled with the overall quality of your E-500 images. If you need more quality than that, it's gonna cost ya. you can see a couple of my first images at http://homepage.mac.com/rodahill.

Good luck,

Rod

1bigdawg
08-08-2006, 04:41 PM
Today my wife and I purchased an Olympus Evolt E-500 Kit with the 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 and the 40-150mm 3.5-4.5 lens. We have a friend who works at a camera shop and although we didn't get any special price for buying it from him the great thing was being able to compare the Olympus to Canon & Nikon the only other cameras we felt we all in the same league.

For us as novices the very minor differences between these cameras at this time was not significant. Some of the aspects that did sway our decision were.

Large 2.5" LCD Screen
Adjustable focus eyepiece
2 lenses
More compact and lighter than Canon or Nikon
Confidence in Olympus quality
Finally and maybe mores important it fit well in my wife's hands and mine and I have very large hands.

We recently purchased new helmet and there was one definite similarity in the purchasing expericence; fit is a very important factor in the final purchasing decision. It doesn't matter how it looks or what it does if it doesn't fit it doesn't work.

We are planning a motorcycle trip from Phoenix to Taos the first week of Sept and I hope to have some great photos and feedback on the camera itself.

We are still awaiting the battery to get charged up so we can begin to play.

Norm in Fujino
08-09-2006, 02:48 AM
Hey, dawg, great decision. You're absolutely right, all the entry-level cameras can produce absolutely great pictures up to very large sizes (I just had two B1 sized prints -- over 1 meter tall-- printed out from my E-300 and they look great), but if it doesn't fit your hands right, it just won't work for you. The ergonomics of the E-500 are much better than some of the competition, and the two-lens kit is a bargain, especially for the 40-150 lens, which is a beautiful piece of work for such a low price. Please check your message box for more info.

m_a_r
08-10-2006, 09:29 PM
Hi everyone,

I'm getting ready for my first dSLR and I am tormenting myself what to get. My budget is limited, which will subsequently also limit the selection of the camera/lenses I can buy. I had an eye on the upcoming Panasonic L1, but it's announced price is beyond what I want/can spend. So back to the decision making. My budget is around 1200-1400 USD (less is better of course, if I can stay under 1000 USD that would be great) and it must cover camera, lens, memory card, warranty and maybe an extra battery, although that one I could get later.

I am looking at:
1) Evolt E-500 with the 2 lens kit
2) Canon XT with the lens kit

I ruled out the E-330 because of the price. I just think the image quality is better with the Canon and quite equal to the E-500. I do not want a camera with 6MP when there are 8MP cameras around, which rules out Minolta, Pentax, and Nikon in that price range. I know those 2 MB won't make a big difference, but it will give me more room to crop and still print 8x10 inch photos or even slightly bigger.

I try to look at as many photos made with the 2 Cameras that are on my list as possible. When the light conditions are good, both perform equally well (IMO). However, when the light conditions are not as nice, for example harsh light, it seems the Canon is better. The E-500 seems to have problems with keeping detail in highlights. I'm not too concerned about the "Jaggies" mentioned in many reviews, since they are not a big issue in a printed photo (I tested it with the photo samples), the clipped highlights however are an issue.

When you go to this site: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM and select the E-500 and compare it to the Canon you will see what I'm talking about. In the first portrait photo (sunlight) the highlights are blown out with the E-500 - no detail left (look at the nose and some areas of the white blouse), while they still contain detail with the Canon. I also tried this comparison with the Panasonic FZ20 (which I have), and it shows more detail in highlight than the E-500. Of course the FZ20 has other issues, like more noise.

What I'm wondering about is the performance when using Raw. All the photos I'm seeing are jpegs, nothing mentioned that they have been shot as raw files and then converted later on. On the site above the author increases the exposure by 0.7 EV, which will of course not help when a camera has some issues with highlights in the first place. On another site the author uses -0.3 to -0.7 EV to keep highlights in check (http://wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/e500-rev.html). So this might help with keeping detail in highlight areas. What I cannot find is a comparison of the same shot between jpeg and raw. Will the highlight details be preserved in Raw files? If that's the case, I would probably go for the E-500.

A friend of mine has the 2 lens E-500 kit. She loves it. She is a big Olympus fan, uses those cameras since the pre digital days. So I will be able to get some hands on experience one of these days.

What makes the E-500 so attractive for me is the price. You get a lot for your money. The Canon XT is now also available for a good price, the kit lens is supposed to be OK at best. But lenses can be replaced later on. And good lenses cost money, no matter if they are from Canon or Olympus. I also like the fact that it is a light camera. I bring my cameras with me all the time, and I am honestly not interested in schlepping a heavy camera with me. I also love shooting with my vintage cameras, especially my Zeiss Ikon (medium format folder from 1937), so this one comes with me a lot also. So weight is def. one of the factors that will make or breal a deal for me.

To end this long post, what I would like to hear from Evolt users here is their own expertience with the highlight issues I mentioned above. Do you have some raw vs jpeg comparisons? How do you circumvent/avoid clipped highlights (if possible at all)? I know at some point every camera will produce blown out highlights. I'm not talking about extreme situation here, more like the situation we have in the first link with the sunlight portrait.

Thanks for you patience, and I'm looking forward to some answers.

Sabine

I am also looking at the Canon XT and the Evolt E-500. One other thing I noticed (maybe because I am more of a beginner) is that the Evolt is a little more confusing and might take a little while to get used to. I like the fact that the Canon XT has a screen above the LCD. It also has a seven point focus. I believe that the Evolt only has 3. However, I think that if you are able to use the Evolt easily and get used to it, it might be the better option, especially if you get the 2-lens kit. It has a bigger LCD display and a better wide angle lens. The Evolt has more scene modes and has two slots for more memory. (CF and xD Picture-card)

Norm in Fujino
08-10-2006, 10:43 PM
I am also looking at the Canon XT and the Evolt E-500. One other thing I noticed (maybe because I am more of a beginner) is that the Evolt is a little more confusing and might take a little while to get used to. I like the fact that the Canon XT has a screen above the LCD. It also has a seven point focus. I believe that the Evolt only has 3. However, I think that if you are able to use the Evolt easily and get used to it, it might be the better option, especially if you get the 2-lens kit. It has a bigger LCD display and a better wide angle lens. The Evolt has more scene modes and has two slots for more memory. (CF and xD Picture-card)

You'll find that you probably use one focus point (the center) 90% of the time. As a kit, the E-500 is ergonomically better IMO than the 350, and the control layout is superior (although this is totally subjective user to user, and I've only played with the 350 in the store on several occasions). The kit lenses on the E-500 are much better than those that come with the 350 (plastic bases on the Canon, metal on the Oly, and the 40-150 is a steal in this package). I'd personally ignore the presence of scene modes, though, and learn to to use minimally P, then A, S, and M as much as possible to get the most from any camera.
The Canon has better high-ISO performance, but the Oly has better color, from everything I've read.
--and don't forget the effective dust filter and in-camera pixel mapping, both of which are non-available with Canon.

lunaris
08-21-2006, 04:00 PM
It's been a while since I logged on here. Wow, several posts, great.

Rodster:

And I haven't encountered any blowout or clipping issues nearly as dramatic as I saw in the photo comparisons online.
That's good to hear. I looked at your photos. The iso1000 shot is impressive, cute dog. Nice grain, not really distracting. Excellent.

I didn't get arount to take the E-500 for a test shooting yet (a friend of mine has one). Guess I should do it soon.

One point that makes the E-Volt attractive (may mean nothing to someone else though) is the compatibility with the Panasonic dSLR. Means I could use the Leica lense(s) made for it (assuming there will be more than one down the road). Or even get that beautiful Panasonic L1 at one point in the future. Decisions ;)

ccminidonks
08-22-2006, 04:20 AM
I just ordered the Evolt 500 and am so glad to have found this very informative forum! I am sure I will have plenty of questions. My last SLR was a Canon (that I got for graduation in 1983 - geesh I'm old LOL) I have since gone through a number of small digitals and am ready to have another SLR :)

1bigdawg
08-22-2006, 02:20 PM
Welcome to the forum, glad the info helped. We have been spending time preparing for our vacation trip and haven't had very much time bonding with the E5. Need to set aside sometime as one of the reason we bought the camera was we wanted great photos.

kgosden
08-22-2006, 05:37 PM
Wow, how interesting. I switched from an AE-1 (not the program version) that I got for graduation in 1981 to a varity of P&S digicams. Then I finally bit into the E-500 a few months back.

mofoto
09-06-2006, 09:49 PM
Hey all,
I happily agree that this camera is by far the best deal in its DSLR class, especially with the 2 lens option, larger LCD screen & automatic dust-removal feature. The only issue that I have is with the noticeably smaller viewfinder, which is a pain for me since I use more manual focusing than autofocus. If that's not an issue, then I definitely recommend purchasing this camera.........hell, I'm keeping mine!!!! Good luck.............

cvicisso
09-26-2006, 06:40 PM
My last SLR was a Canon (that I got for graduation in 1983 - geesh I'm old LOL) I have since gone through a number of small digitals and am ready to have another SLR
Wow, how interesting. I switched from an AE-1 (not the program version) that I got for graduation in 1981 to a varity of P&S digicams. Then I finally bit into the E-500 a few months back.Weird. :eek: I was using a Nikon N2000 (no AF - old school, baby!) when I graduated HS in 1987, and have also been through a slew of P&S digicams since then. My current Canon S2 IS is getting quite a workout, but I too yearn for the ol' SLR (still have it BTW... somewhere!). I'm in the market to replace the S2, but I've been trying to steer clear of dslr... but find myself back on the fence almost every other day. There just doesn't seem to be a P&S 'bridge' camera that answers all the mail (for me)... although some (like the Panasonic FZ-50 and Fuji S-6000fd really come close!). I really miss the big apertures and the ability to blur the background, the low-light capability (sans noise)... sigh... :rolleyes:

Anyway, the 4/3" cameras have seriously caught my eye mainly because of their cross-manufacturer modularity, size and the fact that I don't already have a huge investment in lenses (my Nikkor lenses are cheapish and non-AF so no big loss there).

Oh, my question... sorry! The E-500 looks pretty sweet, but I've read a lot in the last few days about the EXTREME quiet operation of the ol' E-1. That really appeals to me, and I could probably live with a 5MP (heck - I'm doing it now with my S2) while I build up a good stable of 4/3 lenses. How does the E-500 compare to the E-1 in terms of noise (like actual sound - not image noise)? How about the handful of other 4/3 cameras?

Any other advice for something to start out with in order to build up a lens collection and then upgrade to a better body later (maybe in a year... or two... or more)?

Thanks in advance. :)

kgosden
09-27-2006, 07:37 PM
Well, I have not tried the different E series cameras side by side, but I don't find the E-500 any louder mechanically than my old P&S cameras. It does make some noise, although that depends largely on the choosen lens, but it certainly won't scare off the kids.

cvicisso
09-28-2006, 07:25 AM
Well, I have not tried the different E series cameras side by side, but I don't find the E-500 any louder mechanically than my old P&S cameras. It does make some noise, although that depends largely on the choosen lens, but it certainly won't scare off the kids.Thanks. Yeah - I was thinking more of school plays/concerts/etc when you don't want an SLR (digital or otherwise) clicking away and distracting everyone. True it wouldn't scare the kids - but you've got to admit, in that type of scenario, the quieter - the better. I also don't fancy putting a box around my camera to quiet it down. If you Google E-1 and quietest or quiet dslr, etc, you'll see that most people agree that the E-1 is the quietest dslr on earth [still] that's why I asked the question about the sound of the E-500 and other 4/3 cameras. I was thinking that maybe the 'uber-quiet' comments about the E-1 were made prior to the release of the newer cameras and that the 'quietness' is a function of the 4/3 design itself (smaller mirror for example) and not necessarily the E-1 design exclusively.

I find it hard to believe that the E-500 is as quiet as a P&S (assuming you have the fake 'shutter' sound turned off on the P&S) since there's no mirror or anything to slap around.

Has anyone out there used both an E-1 and another 4/3 camera? I would love to hear (pun intentional ;) ) your comments! :D

Thanks again! :D

kathya11
10-06-2006, 04:50 PM
Wow, how interesting. I switched from an AE-1 (not the program version) that I got for graduation in 1981 to a varity of P&S digicams. Then I finally bit into the E-500 a few months back.

I did basically the same (though I had athe AE-1 Program, which I used mostly on manual settings), and want to upgrade from an Olympus D550 that's given me wonderful service -- but I want better photos than that little camera can give me.

A friend recommended the E500, and I'll probably upgrade to it after the holidays. Seeing the positive comments here has be feeling very sanguine about choosing this one.

Now, If I can only settle on a compact point-and-shoot for casual photography....

wh0128
10-07-2006, 02:37 PM
i have a question concerning this camera the E500 versus the Nikon D50. I know the sensor is bigger on the E500 than the D50, but what does the 4/3 mean for the E500? And also, does anyone know if the image quality if both cameras is noticable at a normal 8x10 image size? I prefer Nikon over Olympus but my friend doesn't have a clue. Some help would be appreciated.

cvicisso
10-08-2006, 06:17 PM
I know the sensor is bigger on the E500 than the D50, but what does the 4/3 mean for the E500? Not true. The D50 sensor is [much] larger:

D50: 23.7 x 15.5mm (Nikon 'DX' size)
E-500: 18 x 13.5mm (Olympus '4/3' size)

The '4/3' literally means that the size of a diagonal line drawn from one corner of the sensor to the opposite corner of the sensor is equal to 4/3 inches (=1.33 inches). The matching 4/3 aspect ratio (18/13.5 = 4/3) is coincidental.

Taking the calculation a step further, you'll see that the D50's sensor is over 50% larger (area). Also, its individual photo sites are much larger (43%) than the E-500's - thereby theoretically better able to handle low-light, etc (although technology is advancing and catching up quickly in this area). A rough calculation (disregarding the actual geometry of the photo sites - assuming a simple rectangular configuration) yields:

D50: 3008 pixels / 23.7 mm = 7.9 microns per photo site (roughly)
E-500: 3264 pixels / 18 mm = 5.5 microns per photo site

wh0128
10-08-2006, 06:46 PM
yeah I think I meant the amount of megapixels, and didn't know about the sensor size until I actually decided to read a review on this camera. Thanks for the help.

Cian
10-19-2006, 06:58 AM
There is a lot of confusing information around comparing the size of sensors from Canon / Olympus / Nikon etc, but a good summary is available at:

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/sensor-size.html

It seems to cut through a bit of the dis-information that is around!

Regards,

C.

Gary24
11-02-2006, 08:25 AM
Wow this was a very informative thread. I too have been debating between the E500 and the XT (leaning more toward the E500) and after reading this thread I am going out at lunch time to pick up the E500. found it locally for $720 with the 2 lens and $29 for a 1 gig XD card. Will let you know once I have played with it for awhile.


www.how-wood.com

Effzeeone
11-05-2006, 07:17 PM
After long consideration of the XT, XTi, and the E-500, I recently went with the E-500. My main reasoning was the feature/price ratio of the E-500. I've had the camera for a few days now, putting it through my own amateur photography tests to make sure that I can do with it what I need to. So far, I've been extremely impressed -- with the camera, the two kit lenses, and even my own ability to tweak some extra adjustments out of this camera. My amateur extincts are working quite well with this camera.

The first big test was a local high school football game. No, none of the pictures turned out well enough to brag about them, but I considered shots taken under those conditions to be at the very extreme end of most cameras capabilities. In the end, they were definitely useable, and I was able to learn a lot about the camera and appropriate settings during the 2-hours I was messing around. This alone proved to me that I made the right choice in moving up to a dSLR from "prosumer" cameras, as I could of never gotten anything remotely useable with my previous cameras.

I have no regrets at all with the E-500 decision, and in fact I'm kicking myself for having narrow Canon vision for so long during the shopping process. I could've already had this wonderful E-500 for weeks now instead of days, allowing me to use it for several important recent events.

Great camera, nice kit lenses, fantastic price.

Gary24
11-06-2006, 10:41 AM
I picked mine up Thursday and brought it to work on Friday. Went around downtown NYC at lunch and shot a bunch of landscapes. On Saturday I shot 60+ pics at my daughters soccer game and the long lens worked very well (much better then my old Point and shoot). The only weird thing I have seen is that 10 pics in a row had an odd blueish tint to them and then it went back to normal after those 10 pics. Don't know if I hit some button (was wearing gloves so I might have miss hit something) or if it is something else. Any ideas?

www.how-wood.com

kgosden
11-06-2006, 08:34 PM
Gary it sounds as if you have 'hit' the one user interface design flaw in the E-500. The button that your right thumb most likely hits is just below the control dial (it has the little computer monitor like icon). Unfortunately this is set to be the custom, one-touch white balance setting button. Foolishly Olympus uses the shutter button to both take the custom white balance exposure and then a second shutter button press to accept the custom setting. This means that when using the viewfinder and clicking away you can sometimes hit the button with your thumb and then the shutter twice...PRESTO, you now have set some wacky white balance.

Olympus realized most of this problem and the latest E-500 firmware will let you either disable the button or set it to something rather harmless like depth of field preview. The setting for that button is found on the menu under the 'wrench 1'. Scroll through the options and you will find the button icon and the word function.

Wiser minds have suggested that Olympus should just change the white balance acceptance to something besides the shutter button. It would also be nice if the camera beeped or something when you hit the custom white balance button to warn you.

Gary24
11-07-2006, 05:08 AM
Gary it sounds as if you have 'hit' the one user interface design flaw in the E-500. The button that your right thumb most likely hits is just below the control dial (it has the little computer monitor like icon). Unfortunately this is set to be the custom, one-touch white balance setting button. Foolishly Olympus uses the shutter button to both take the custom white balance exposure and then a second shutter button press to accept the custom setting. This means that when using the viewfinder and clicking away you can sometimes hit the button with your thumb and then the shutter twice...PRESTO, you now have set some wacky white balance.

Olympus realized most of this problem and the latest E-500 firmware will let you either disable the button or set it to something rather harmless like depth of field preview. The setting for that button is found on the menu under the 'wrench 1'. Scroll through the options and you will find the button icon and the word function.

Wiser minds have suggested that Olympus should just change the white balance acceptance to something besides the shutter button. It would also be nice if the camera beeped or something when you hit the custom white balance button to warn you.

Thanks for the reply. Like I said it was cold out and I was wearing gloves so I was probably hitting the button without noticing it. I did see that programmable feature in the book so I will see if I can change it to something else.

www.how-wood.com

Gary24
11-07-2006, 07:30 PM
Just reprogrammed the button so hopefully that will take care of that issue. Going away for the weekend and hoping to take a whole card full of picutres. Hopefully none of them will be blue!:D


www.how-wood.com

shoeytennis
11-10-2006, 03:44 PM
I'm doing some looking around here and im looking at this nice little camera!
i was wondering how well this camera performed in low light situations.
i love to take pictures at dark or simply when tis darker. also indoor pics my camera doesnt so good. anyone know how good this guy can do?

Overland1
12-04-2006, 06:01 PM
Wow! Lots of info and opinions on the E-500, which is what I have been considering as a higher level digital camera. I have been using an old (but still works well!) OM-10 and a Kodak DCS3800, the latter being a quick P&S digi that I carry in the car for really quick shots.

After buying my wife a C-740 a few years ago and a Stylus 710 last month, it looks like another Olympus camera may join the family soon. I actually got m hands on one today at CompUSA and it has a pretty good feel about it, although there was no lens available to test it with.

I am wondering if my Sunpak flash from the OM-10 will work well with the E-500.... any suggestions?

kgosden
12-04-2006, 08:47 PM
Most older flashes use too high a trigger voltage and can potentially fry a DSLR. DSLR's tend to like flasahes that use a trigger voltage of 6V or less. There are a few flash buffers that can insulate the camera from the higher trigger voltage of older flashes, but they seem to cost $35 or so. It is almost a better deal to buy a dedicated TTL flash for the cost difference and the benefits.

drama
12-29-2006, 06:46 PM
I recently tried a E500, one thing I did not like about it, was the small dark view finder
I felt this was a big problem, didnt see it stated here

Norm in Fujino
12-29-2006, 07:12 PM
I recently tried a E500, one thing I did not like about it, was the small dark view finder
I felt this was a big problem, didnt see it stated here

The 4/3 cameras do have a proportionally smaller vf, but most people who've tried them (those whose comments I've seen and read) have noticed (as have I) that once you put your eye to the viewfinder you become accustomed to whatever the size within a few minutes of use. If you're quickly switching back and forth between the E-500 and a 35mm film camera with 100% vf like my Nikon F3, the difference in size and brightness may be troubling, but if you're simply using the E-500 or other 4/3 camera alone, the size shouldl be no problem (possible exceptions in the case of manual focusing in low-light surroundings, when wearing glasses or specific eyesight problems). I've found it also greatly helps to add the optional large rubber eyecup (I have the E-300, but its vf size is the same), since the eyecup forces the eye to the proper relief distance and cuts off all surrounding light.

Riley
12-29-2006, 09:48 PM
I recently tried a E500, one thing I did not like about it, was the small dark view finder
I felt this was a big problem, didnt see it stated here

there is a fixer for at least some of that
a 1.2 mag finder that fits outside the camera, Oly part

Riley

drama
01-14-2007, 09:52 AM
Thanks Riley
That looks like an intresting / necessary accesory

Hi
I have an OM 10 SLR, can I use the lens that came with it for a E 500?

Riley
01-14-2007, 09:57 AM
if u mean the four thirds zoom on the Om
no
the image circle is way bigger on the OM
and there are no electrical connections between the lens and the body
so there is no aperture, focus control etc

if u mean the OM lens on the E500 yes
but u need an adapter, and it will be manual focus

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/omz.html

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/any-lens.html

drama
01-14-2007, 10:06 AM
Riley
Thanks for the lightning fast reply :)

Getting the adapter here will be a major issue
Might just use it till, I pick up a dslr

Riley
01-14-2007, 10:32 AM
have a look on ebay, there are usually dozens of them
or chat with these guys

http://www.cameraquest.com/adapt_olyE1.htm

tonay
02-04-2007, 05:15 AM
Hello

For anyone who bought the 2 lens kit. Do either of those lens have image stabilization in them? If not - what do I look for in the lens detail that will say image stabilized?

Thanks

Riley
02-04-2007, 05:49 AM
The only lens for 4/3 with OIS is the LEICA D VARIO-ELMARIT 14-50mm/F2.8-3.5 ASPH. But five other lenses are due from Leica this year, some will come with OIS. These lens will work on E system Olympus but only in 1 mode.

Norm in Fujino
02-04-2007, 07:08 AM
In answer to your question about "how to know?" it's all up to your eyes. If it looks good to you, it is. To give yourself a standard, use a tripod and shoot some test shots of still life subjects outdoors in good light, with shutter speeds of 1/250 or above. If you didn't jiggle the tripod when shooting, the results should be perfectly "stabilized."
The clarity of shots is also affected by the sharpness; you may want to adjust the sharpness upwards in camera, or later in post-processing.

tonay
02-11-2007, 05:52 PM
Thank you.

I'm so torn and being new to this very confused. I went out and held cameras and played around this weekend. The Olympus 500 feels great and seem sto be the best value. The sony feels good to and has the stabilization in the body. The clerk was pushing the Nikon D40 but I think he just wanted to move the product, the D50 seemed nice and had a good feel. The only thing I really know is the Canon's are out - the feel was poor.

Also, not to sound like a tool but are all lenses auto focus?

Thanks again

Riley
02-11-2007, 06:24 PM
Yeah AF is on everything I can think of except more specialist cameras like M8 and RD-1.

Olympus make a solid camera, it seems like you noticed the difference there in handling the bodies which is an important step. I dont like the low end Canons either, they feel cheap and plasticy, like hanging onto a plastic toaster.

Since we are now, what, 3 weeks from PMA, a large camera manufacturer show event in which new models are launched. And the next launch opportunity being Photokina is a long ways off, the gear for the near future will be coming out in PMA.

Olympus have 3 new bodies in the offer, and the E-500 will be replaced, probably with E-510. So there might be an opportunity to either pick up a soon to be redundant model E-500, or get the newer 510 when its released at PMA. The other 2 bodies are the pro E-P1 and the E-410 the global release of an updated E-400. Biggest feature on the new ones is to be LiveView I think, but we will have to wait and see.

For the others, the D50 is proven value, mostly it seems the Nikon crowd are pretty happy with them, and as it is to be pensioned off if not already, should be cheap, similar deal to E-500. I dont know enough about the Sony to comment.

either way, my advice is to keep looking around like you are doing, but wait until PMA has gone by, because it will change things for the near future. Take your time and you wont be disappointed.

tonay
02-12-2007, 03:59 AM
Thank you much

I figured there was a new model coming based on the price changes. Costco just recently sold out there "silver" body models for $599 US so I'll keep a watchful eye. A purchase in april/may is what I'm hoping for.

Thanks again

Riley
02-12-2007, 04:12 AM
in a late development
there have been E-330's, I believe 2,
'body only' cameras on ebay yesterday for around $450

tonay
02-18-2007, 03:20 PM
Thanks for the advice.

Any thoughts on the smaller view finder (eye hole, whatever it's called) on the E500 vs. the others?

I'd like to say my local circuit city stinks as their camera power unit has been down for 2 weeks and they are the only place I can compare the Sony and Olymplus Head to Head.

I'm in a pickel w/ the 2
1. Olympus :cheaper and better value, I have xD cards and a reader
2. Sony: image stabilization and better grip feel

I'm totally an newbie and plan to stay a beginner. BTW - what is this hole ISO thing I keep reading about?

Thanks again

kgosden
02-18-2007, 08:22 PM
ISO is a numeric scale used to describe the relative sensitivity to light of film (or a digital sensor). This is also referred to as a film 'speed'. A lower number is less sensitive to light a higher number is more sensitive. With higher numbers you can use a faster shutter speed or a smaller aperture. Noise typically increases with higher ISO's.

Riley
02-18-2007, 09:03 PM
there is an Olympus accessory: part ME-1 a 1.2x magnification eyecup finder, that relieves the smallness somewhat, but its not like the dimness, caused by the smaller size, or the size of the finder is going to be one of your biggest problems.

E-500 takes xD-Picture Card, CompactFlash Card, Type I or II, Microdrive

higher iso used for more low-light situations, too speed up the shutter in those circumstances and avoid camera shake

Norm in Fujino
02-18-2007, 09:06 PM
I'm in a pickel w/ the 2
1. Olympus :cheaper and better value, I have xD cards and a reader
2. Sony: image stabilization and better grip feel

I'm totally an newbie and plan to stay a beginner. BTW - what is this hole ISO thing I keep reading about?


If you're sticking with the kit lenses, the olympus will give you better optical value. I wouldn't consider using the xD cards for anything but backup. Invest in a decent speed Compact Flash card and cheap reader. Don't consider IS (image stabilization) as a cure-all for poor technique. As for ISO, you seriously need to do some reading about basic photographic concepts or you will be disappointed with any camera you get. It's not a walk in the park. You might be better satisfied with a good P&S like a ultrazoom type.

tonay
02-19-2007, 05:13 PM
I have an olympus UZ765 but it's just to slow in taking pics and getting read for the next. I almost have to "pose" every pic so I figured I"ll go dSLR because I don;t want a camera that's the size of a credit card.

If you have any suggestions on increasing the speed on my current cam I'd love to hear!

Thanks